[28060] trunk/dports/archivers/sharutils/Portfile

[Boey Maun Suang]

On 21/08/2007, at 02:55, Landon Fuller wrote:

> I don't see any advantage to adding complexity here. I believe we  
> should write something like this up in the guide:
> 	The default installation of the software should be as feature  
> complete, out of the box, as is possible. Variants should only be  
> used for enabling incompatible options, or *expensive* features  
> that most individuals will not need.

+1 from me.  As I understand it, the design philosophy of MacPorts  
from the beginning was "Principle of Least Surprise", and that went  
for the ports as well as the core MacPorts code.  I can't imagine  
many things more frustrating to an ordinary user than installing a  
program that they thought had localised text, which they wanted  
because their English wasn't that strong, only to discover that it  
didn't install that way by default.  The same thing goes for other  
usual features that can optionally be disabled.  The more  
knowledgable users amongst us can always turn off things we don't  
want or need; the same can't be said for less advanced users trying  
to find out how to turn _on_ things that they want or need (though  
for some reasons, like security, it may be prudent to try to save  
users from themselves).

Now I don't mean to say that I don't like Rainer's other idea of  
being able to set MacPorts-wide variant options; that actually  
appeals to me a lot.  Such a mechanism, however, is orthogonal to the  
concern at hand, which is about what should be enabled by default,  
and I agree with Landon on that.  I can't help but think that that  
sort of thinking goes a long way towards the reputation for ease of  
use enjoyed by Mac OS and the software that runs on it, and I for one  
would want to avoid denting that as much as possible.

Kind regards,


Maun Suang

-- 
Boey Maun Suang (Boey is my surname)
Email: boeyms at macports dot org