OK, I agree with you Alvaro :) good arguments.
Greetings, Jedrzej Nowak 20-01-2011 06:18 użytkownik "Alvaro Lopez Ortega" <[email protected]> napisał: > On 20/01/2011, at 05:13, Jędrzej Nowak wrote: > >> For me the option Alvaro idea is OK, but the consistency as Diego says >> is important too... so maybe it's even better to remove the cpu count >> and just leave the cores count ? ( exactly as Diego says ) >> And there is still 3rd option "2,4 GHz, UNK Logical Processors, 2 >> Cores" which is bad for me... > > Even though I do agree with keeping the interface as consistent as possible across all the different platforms, I think we ought to evaluate what is more important: the consistency along every single platform, or to remove features from users who could actually have them. > > In this case we are talking about a quite superfluous feature without which we could live. However, there will be occasions on which the common lowest multiple of supported technologies may leave us without any available option. > > There are two kind of situations. First, where a widespread technology is missing form a certain platform, like the case we are discussing about. The second is when there is an interesting technology available on a single platform: think of RBAC on Solaris or HTTP deferred accept on BSD. I will stick with the former case, since the technologies on the second group can be considered nice-to-have, and thus no really a priority. > > IMO, the right thing to do is to try keep as many people as happy as possible. Basically, to try to maximize the positive user experience in the real World. That means that we ought to take into account that there are many more people using Cherokee on Linux and MacOS X than on BSD, and therefore the 'damage' of losing functionality on those environments would be multiplied a 'higher impact' factor. > > In this specific case, I do not think that keeping the consistency of a tiny string across the complete set of supported platform would be worth the lose of functionality on the most used ones, actually. > > You know, this is all about providing the best possible experience for as many people as possible.. and even if sometimes it is not trivial to evaluate what the best option is, we must keep the target in mind. > > Cheers! > > > PS: BTW, please, do not CC the announcement mailing list on these discussions. :) > > -- > Octality > http://www.octality.com/ >
_______________________________________________ Cherokee mailing list [email protected] http://lists.octality.com/listinfo/cherokee
