[Moved from the UHC thread – lets stop treading on those guys toes, they did something very very shiny] On 23 Apr 2009, at 07:02, Richard O'Keefe wrote:
It's irrelevant, because I _do_ have root access to my machine,
How nice to be you. Since the argument is entirely about people who _don't_, your point it?
His point is that that kind of person is not the only kind of person, so to base an argument on what they want is as weak as basing an argument on what he wants.
It is clear that the only sensible default is no default.
That sounds pretty sensible to me too – much like darcs asks what your email address is the first time you work on a repository, cabal should probably ask the first time you run it "do you prefer global or user installs?"
I think the right question is "how many people prefer user installs over system installs, wrt. their hackage packages?".
No, because the costs are asymmetric.
I think this is a case of not seeing the costs to the other users because you're firmly entrenched in your camp. I would have said originally that the costs are asymmetric too – but that it's a much greater cost for the people who expect all installers to do global installs. So I think that the question asked there is a very valid one. However, I do like the solution of not giving any default. Bob