[opensource-dev] Is 'STANDALONE' confusing?

Thickbrick Sleaford thickbrick.sleaford at gmail.com
Mon Feb 21 07:00:38 PST 2011

On Monday 21 February 2011 16:38:01 Boroondas Gupte wrote:
> On 02/21/2011 03:28 PM, Oz Linden (Scott Lawrence) wrote:
> > If we are going to change it, the replacement term should, in addition
> > to being more accurately descriptive of what it does, be an affirmative
> > term - don't suggest any 'NO_*" replacements.
> Would it be acceptable to invert the setting's semantic in order to
> avoid a negation? I.e., STANDALONE=OFF would become NEW_SETTING=ON and
> vice versa. That'd allow for easy-to-understand names like
> Off course, the default value should be inverted together with the
> setting's semantic, such that the default behavior does not change.

I agree with Boroondas. I think it *should* be changed, and my vote goes to 
USE_PREBUILT_LIBS (which should default to on.)


More information about the opensource-dev mailing list