Re: colorls in base

[John Nemeth <jnemeth%cue.bc.ca@localhost>]

On Feb 16,  3:02pm, Christos Zoulas wrote:
} In article <20190216102435.GA10691%grapefruit.pr0.tips@localhost>,
} Timo Buhrmester  <fstd.lkml%gmail.com@localhost> wrote:
} >> All I know is that some directories look like an "explosion in a
} >> paint factory" or "angry fruit salad".
} >I wonder why the die-hard monochrome users keep arguing from a
} >"but it isn't pretty" point of view.  It's not supposed to be pretty,
} >it's supposed to augment the information presented.
} >
} >> The colours convey absolutely no information to me.  I need to use
} >> other information to figure out what the colours are trying to tell
} >> me.
} >And that's fine and how it's supposed to be.  The colors helped drawing
} >your attention to it quickly.  I don't think anybody here is arguing
} >that colors would directly encode high-level diagnostic information.
} >
} >
} >To the color-blind people, I get it, it's counter productive for you.
} >However I don't get the feeling that anybody is trying to enable
} >colors unconditionally, or by default even.  I also have issues with
} >the "I can't tell apart colors, so nobody may use colors" mindset.
} >
} >We shouldn't put up artificial barriers for color-blind people (nor any
} >other disability), which in this case would mean "colors, if present,
} >shouldn't be enabled by default" (that said, our installer is blue...)
} >but that's about the extent of it IMHO.
} 
} Yes, what I don't understand (because nobody has stated a technical
} reason other than 'fluff'), why we shouldn't we have the feature in base
} at all. Nobody proposed to enable it by default. As features become
} standard to other OS's we should evaluate if we should follow suit.

     I consider this to be a good reason.  We shouldn't be adding
fluff just so that we can keep up with the Joneses.

} Things change over time; we don't go rip out color output compiler
} support from the compilers. It is not enabled by default so it is
} invisible. So will be having color in some programs in base. It will
} be invisible unless you specifically turn it on. 

     I'm not a no changenik.  However, I think change needs to have
demonstrated value.  I do oppose change when it is done for the
sake of change.  To me, fluff is not demonstrated value, especially
when you consider our market segment.

} It is not frictionless (and should be but that's another issue) to
} "install from pkgsrc" and it's a good question why not have the feature

     You're right, that's a different question.  If it is really
problem, then it needs solving, independently of any other question.

} in base when the majority of the users just install replacements from
} pkgsrc because of the lack of features. It is not 1980 anymore and

     Who is this "majority" of which you speak?  I haven't take a
count, but it feels to me that there are less then a dozen people
participating in this thread (some of whom are very vocal).

} we don't need to be frugal about resources (specially when they can
} be compiled out).

     Compiling out stuff is not free.  It takes disk space and
large amounts of admin time for on-going maintenance.

}-- End of excerpt from Christos Zoulas