Re: A whoops in the sequences fixups?

    Date:        Tue, 27 Jul 2004 23:39:37 +0200
    From:        Axel Belinfante <[email protected]>
    Message-ID:  <[email protected]>

  | After posting my initial diff I have been wondering whether it
  | makes sense to allow the user to choose the override order
  | (which overides what, a bit like the the possibilty to specify
  |  the 'order' as in 'order allow,disallow' that I think I
  |  remember having seen in web server (apache?) config files
  |  when access rights are specified)

No, too much complexity here for not enough benefit.
The way it is now works fine (you'd only want allow,disallow
if the default could also be switched to show nothing).

  | Alternatively/additionally, if a sequence matches both with the
  | positive list(s) and the negative list(s?), we could try to see if
  | one match is more 'precise' (maybe there is a better word)
  | than the other one, and give precedence to the most precise match,

No, again, too much complexity, not enough benefit.   That one you'd
never manage to explain to the "average user" (assuming there is
such a thing for exmh) no matter how much documentation you write.

  | On a related note: I like the concept (words) postive and negative
  | because I think it would be useful to have three list of sequences:
  |  - one negative (don't show is indeed maybe a better name)
  |  - one positive (show when non-empty)
  |  - another positive (show 'always')

Do we really need to ever show empty sequences?   Isn't just a missing
sequence name (for a sequence that would be shown) enough for this?
Maybe its just me, but I hate screen clutter, if simply leaving something
out conveys the correct information, do it that way.

kre