On 3/29/06, Shane Stixrud <email@example.com> wrote:Ah. Well that is understandable. They certainly have a point of view which I have not yet had the honor of.
On Wed, 29 Mar 2006, Arthur Pemberton wrote:
> Only case I see here is individual desire. People passioate enough about
> this need to solve the problem. I and apperently many others simply do not
> see this as a big enough problem. I am actually suprised by the length of
> this thread. Don't get me wrong, I see the problem, and I think I understand
> it. It just isn't a hurdle I run into often. Now, if we were talking about
> the sendmail conf files....
I don't really agree. I think the reason you see a number of RedHat
employees agreeing that this is important is because there are real
issues their enterprise customers want addressed that is either directly
or indirectly negatively affected by this more fundamental issue.
Might I make a suggestion to anyone considerinf "fixing" this. I would
suggest the use of virtual files. So for example, program-foo which
uses program-foo.conf could attempt to read/parse/saveto
program-foo.conf which could be actually a virtual file serving as a
front end to a system which handles everything else.
As a boy I jumped through Windows, as a man I play with Penguins.