From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu Subject: Re: [9fans] Installed Plan 9, now what? References: <200312090454.hB94skl24638@augusta.math.psu.edu> <20031209183353.GA5257@sigint.cs.purdue.edu> Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-15; format=flowed From: Brantley Coile MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20031209183353.GA5257@sigint.cs.purdue.edu> User-Agent: Opera7.11/Win32 M2 build 2887 Date: Tue, 9 Dec 2003 14:23:13 -0500 Topicbox-Message-UUID: 9e92ab3a-eacc-11e9-9e20-41e7f4b1d025 On Tue, 9 Dec 2003 13:33:53 -0500, wrote: > On Mon, Dec 08, 2003 at 11:54:45PM -0500, Dan Cross wrote: >> But, what's a better alternative? I'm all eyes. > > The Windows registry? *ducks* > > I have to agree with Charles and Geoff. The only thing .local files buy > you is overwrite protection, which is already provided by pull. You > still > have to check that your overrides in .local are valid. Is there a way > around that problem that doesn't involve Star Trek-type AI or mind > reading? > > Ultimately, it's the price one pays for the flexibility of expressing > configuration info as shell scripts instead of a database (or registry) > of predetermined, paramaterized, versioned configuration variables. > No no no no no no no no NOOOOOOO! (It had to be expressed in the most direct manner possible.) It was good that MS went the way of a central registry. We now know for sure that it's a very bad idea. Brantley