[opensource-dev] Is 'STANDALONE' confusing?
discrete.dreamscape at gmail.com
Mon Feb 21 07:19:03 PST 2011
USE_PREBUILT_LIBS doesn't make absolute sense either if you consider the
fact that your system's libraries are "prebuilt". This would imply that the
inverse of the setting would cause supporting libraries to be built from
source or some such.
I would make it something like "USE_LINDEN_LIBS".
On Mon, Feb 21, 2011 at 10:00 AM, Thickbrick Sleaford <
thickbrick.sleaford at gmail.com> wrote:
> 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
> > USE_PREBUILD_LIBS or DOWNLOAD_NEEDED_DEPENDENCIES.
> > 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.)
> Policies and (un)subscribe information available here:
> Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the opensource-dev