[opensource-dev] Is 'STANDALONE' confusing?
angel_of_crimson at hotmail.com
Mon Feb 21 10:25:24 PST 2011
As a tester I gotta say Boroondas's suggestion to me, is far and away the least confusing... so it gets my vote too...
> From: thickbrick.sleaford at gmail.com
> To: opensource-dev at lists.secondlife.com
> Date: Mon, 21 Feb 2011 17:00:38 +0200
> Subject: Re: [opensource-dev] Is 'STANDALONE' confusing?
> 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 privileges
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the opensource-dev