<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd"><html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"><head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" http-equiv="Content-Type"/>
</head><body style="">
<div>
</div>
<div>
<br/>Reinier Olislagers <reinierolislagers@gmail.com> hat am 15. August 2012 um 16:03 geschrieben:> On 15-8-2012 15:13, Jürgen Hestermann wrote:
<br/>>[...]
<br/>> >> Regardless, a user can customize that fallback environmentoptions.xml
<br/>> >> and distribute it. That's why there's an overwrite question.
<br/>> >
<br/>> > Yes, but if it is not used why ask and let the user believe that it is
<br/>> > used? There are lots of other XML files in the installation path which
<br/>> > seem to be overwritten silently when installing a snapshot.
<br/>> Never seen any evidence of silent overwrites.
<br/>> The fallback environmentoptions.xml is used in some situation. I can't
<br/>> help it you don't grasp the difference of primary versus secondary
<br/>> config path... TBH it took me a while to catch on as well.
<br/>> For discussion: perhaps this version could be renamed as
<br/>> environmentoptionstemplate.xml or something?
</div>
<div>
</div>
<div>
That would complicate things.
</div>
<div>
IMO it would better if the secondary folder has is renamed and/or a prominent README.txt file is put there.
</div>
<div>
<br/>
<br/>>[...]
</div>
<div>
</div>
<div>
Mattias
</div>
<div>
</div>
</body></html>