[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: LYNX-DEV Supression of messages in Lynx

From: Eric Anderson
Subject: RE: LYNX-DEV Supression of messages in Lynx
Date: Thu, 19 Feb 1998 09:25:01 -0500

I do not wish to modify the code. 

All I asked was if there was a way to suppress the message. If it can't
be done from the command line, then so be it.

We are not restricting the user from actually going in and messing
around with the config file or anything else. We'd just PREFER they

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Al Gilman [SMTP:address@hidden
> Sent: Wednesday, February 18, 1998 5:09 PM
> To:   Eric Anderson
> Cc:   address@hidden
> Subject:      Re: LYNX-DEV Supression of messages in Lynx
> Sorry to sound so severe.  But you still don't seem to have
> absorbed the Lynx ethos or the significance of the GNU Public
> License under which it is made available to you.
> If you want help modifying Lynx, you really need to listen to
> ideas as to how your modification can be a general improvement.
> You don't have the speech users now [but you're at risk of
> violating of the ADA if you don't have the capability to have
> such users].  We (i.e. Lynx) do have speech users.  I was just
> trying to inform you of how your mod could be viewed as a plus
> for the program and hence enthusicastically supported.
> Legally, at the minimum, you are required to share your patches.
> Morally, you should make a reasonable effort to do your changes
> in the way that has the broadest utility.  If you convince the
> development team to incorporate your patches, you get free
> maintenance after that.  Do you want to be maintaining your
> patches forever, or do you want us to do it?
> It is true that you can't do all what you want with configuration
> variables.  There are people on the list who have done it all
> before (not me) and who operate freenets.
> The compile time fiddles to take Lynx private (offer an opaque
> interface for anonymous users) are well understood but not well
> documented because the people who have to defend Unix systems
> from hackers are paranoid, shall I say.
> So the knowledge you seek is probably out here somewhere.
> But you will have to motivate somebody to divulge it.  Better.
> Al
> to follow up on what Eric Anderson said:
> > Please do not put words into my mouth. We are not trying to do
> > to our customers. And we do not see them as Dumb.
> > 
> > We are using Lynx ONLY as an HTML viewer for an HTML based help
> system
> > for our product. They will not be attached to any other servers and
> will
> > not need any other access other than the help files we provide.
> > Therefore, Lynx has been "distilled" via every configuration setting
> I
> > could find, to prevent users from getting confused, when all they
> are
> > supposed to be doing with it is viewing our help documentation.
> There is
> > no attachment to the web, or to any servers. All displayed files
> will be
> > local. 
> > 
> > We have no speech users. Most of our users are people working in
> data
> > entry, order entry and warehouses. The total time they will actually
> use
> > LYNX will be a matter of minutes - to look up a help topic, follow
> any
> > related links to the info they want, print it(maybe) and get back to
> our
> > system.
> > 
> > Therefore I do not see that we are inhibiting our users from seeing
> the
> > web. We are also not saying they are, or trying to keep them dumb,
> but
> > rather only attempting to make the interface between our product and
> > Lynx (as help viewer) as seamless and unconfusing as possible.
> > 
> > Thank you.
> > 
> > 

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]