Re: lynx-dev Re: lynx.cfg bloat (was various fixes)

[Philip Webb]

990818 Klaus Weide, Webmaster Jim & Philip Webb discussed:
PW> the best way to partition  lynx.cfg  is to separate controls from docs
JS> Separating the comments from the active controls is very easy:
JS>   grep -v '^#' lynx.cfg | grep -v '^$'
JS> If someone needs a lynx.cfg file without the extra text,
JS> they should do this, then either chop out what they don't need
JS> or simply leave in their alterations.

yes if: (1) you have a UNIX system, (2) you're an experienced user.
 
JS> Let's not make 2 files where one is adequate ...

"adequate" begs the question ...

JS> ... nor add complex include mechanisms.

... as HN said: Hear! Hear!
 
KW> *If* lynx.cfg is too big and something needs to be done about it,
KW> anything that keeps the comments & explanations together with the options
KW> is much better than anything that separates the explanations
KW> from the real options.  For distribution by lynx-dev that is.
 
that's just a long-winded way of saying `I disagree',
which of course you are perfectly entitled to do.

you are both very long-standing Lynx developer-users (5 years?),
who can recite  lynx.cfg  blindfold (smile),
but as such you may be seriously underestimating
how intimidating a 2200-line document is to newcomers
or to over-worked sysadmins most of whose users want the Big Two;
and (to repeat)  lynx.cfg  has increased  18 %  since 2-8-2dev.19 .
a simple list of options + default values, with occasional subject-headings
& a note at the top refering users to a separate help commentary,
would be much less intimidating to those less expert than yourselves
without being any the less comprehensible taken together.

does anyone other than us four have thoughts on this subject?

-- 
========================,,============================================
SUPPORT     ___________//___,  Philip Webb : address@hidden
ELECTRIC   /] [] [] [] [] []|  Centre for Urban & Community Studies
TRANSIT    `-O----------O---'  University of Toronto