RFC -- application without user configuration?

[Christopher Browne]

On Mon, Jan 13, 2014 at 3:42 PM, Giles Orr <gilesorr-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w at public.gmane.org> wrote:

> On 13 January 2014 14:48, William Park <opengeometry-FFYn/CNdgSA at public.gmane.org> wrote:
>
>> Question:
>>     Do you know sizable application that has no user configuration at
>>     all, or the configuration is done in source file?  When I say
>>     "sizable", I mean things like spreadsheet, not 'ls' or 'make'.
>>
>>     Most, if not all, apps nowadays have user configuration as their
>>     selling point.  So, I would be interested in hearing from old guys.
>>
>> Background:
>>     I decided against using or extending Python, because it eventually
>>     becomes a trap.  It's easy at the beginning, but as soon as
>>     customization comes into play, I'm stuck with what I can find or do
>>     in Python.  Some will say Python/Ruby is designed for that.  But,
>>     considering target audience, business practice, use case,
>>     deployment, and support, it's not that simple in real world.
>>
>>     So, I wrote my own code, which turns out to be glorified wordexp(3)
>>     with if/for/while things.  But, in trying to avoid trap dug by
>>     someone else, it feels like I'm digging my own trap to fall into.
>>
>>     In ERP/accounting system, you practically never make changes once
>>     the business flow has been set.  You will see people use 20 years
>>     old setup, and that's because their business process has not changed
>>     for 20 years.  So, "user configuration" has different meaning in
>>     this part of world.
>>
>>     I'm interested in looking at applications which has no user
>>     configuration at all, or if there is config file, then it's included
>>     as part of source.  Whether you edit external config file or source
>>     file, editing would be the same.  Just that users don't get to edit
>>     anything.
>>
>
> The wm2 window manager: http://www.all-day-breakfast.com/wm2/ .  You'll
> like it: install and go, thou shalt not configure.  Just remember that
> removing configurability means you'd better have defaults so good they
> appeal to enough people to support your product.  That's not easy.
> Speaking of which ... I liked wm2, but I imagine it appealed to a very
> narrow audience!
>
>
wmx  <http://www.all-day-breakfast.com/wmx/> went in the other direction;
the file Config.h, in the source tree, is where you can configure the 106
things that can be fiddled with.

You then recompile wmx, which pretty much requires recompiling *all* of it
(in that pretty much all the files will refer to Config.h).

Mind you, it was, in my pre-tiling WMs days, my  second favorite choice,
and I never modified the built-in configuration at all.
-- 
When confronted by a difficult problem, solve it by reducing it to the
question, "How would the Lone Ranger handle this?"
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://gtalug.org/pipermail/legacy/attachments/20140113/a1f807f0/attachment.html>