On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 10:07:15AM -0400, Steve Wills wrote: > > > > I wonder if it is worth to let the question to install dialog4ports. > > > > I mean dialog4ports being mandatory you should just be installed directly > > doesn't it? > > > > anyone have an opinion about this? > > > > I will remove the question on 27/03 if I got more please do than please > > don't at > > that time. > > The question does lead one to think it's optional. If it's not optional, > then there shouldn't be a prompt. I think it should be optional. IMHO, the > requirement being mandator violates POLA, as does the prompt. These are > questions that should have been answered before it was committed. > > Steve > >
Why would dialog4ports be optional, the dialog(1) from base isn't able to reflect what the new option framwork does, keeping it and both code to have both, looks like a non sense to me. Bapt
pgpXV0bQeOnNz.pgp
Description: PGP signature
