Is it time to delete wineinstall?
Dimitrie O. Paun
dpaun at rogers.com
Sun Nov 14 16:41:30 CST 2004
On Sun, Nov 14, 2004 at 05:24:22PM -0500, Chris Morgan wrote:
> How is wineinstall easier than instructing them to run ./configure, make and
> make install? Having wineinstall implies that the script does something
> extra that wine needs that differs from the normal way you build and install
> a program from source.
Indeed, this is my position as well. Every time I have an app that
needs aditional scripts then the standard ./configure, make and make install,
I get nervous, and I simply distrust/dislike the application. It forces me
to question, investigate, worry about what a heck is going on with my
system. I don't like that. In fact, I hate it. I have administering my
machine, and I especially hate when I'm forced to do it.
Anything that is standard (in this case ./configure, make and make install)
sort of goes in the automatic part of the brain, you don't register it.
The same holds true for common menu setup in apps, consistent UI, etc.
When you deviate from the standard, you bring the action into the conscious
part of the brain, you force a decision, you raise questions, and all that
translate into more work/stress/etc for the user. Not Good (TM).
We should deviate from the standard only in cases where we have a *heck*
of a lot of reason to, not for trivial benefits. Those end up costing us
a lot more in the end.
More information about the wine-devel