Prefs Removal Proposal
lpsolit at gmail.com
Wed Aug 29 18:23:50 UTC 2007
> So instead of telling users to correctly configure their machines, we
> provide an additional configuration mechanism?
We provide something which works for all users who had problems with
their proxy. That's enough for me to keep it.
> It seems more irrelevant than the others. I can see vague use cases for
> them (although yes, of course, they are just as easy to work around).
Your workaround (adding a dot in a comment) is irritating. Better to
turn off the parameters in this case.
> Really? Including classifications, for example?
Irrelevant as the product automatically defines the classification the
bug belongs to.
> Who uses this stuff these days?
Probably not you. Not a reason to remove it, though. And e.g. Novell
uses it a lot, from what I heard.
> We hard-code a default, which is the default we've been using for N
> years now. As it's editable, people can always edit it if they don't
> like it.
And you still need a mechanism for this "special" saved search. Not very
More information about the developers