Re: user-controlled load-path extension: load-dir

[Dimitri Fontaine]

chad <address@hidden> writes:
> I don't understand your resistance to having the installer do the editing
> instead of the user. This seems like a more general solution that avoids
> some potential problems and would be useful in situations where a
> magic directory would not (for example, where *some* configuration
> is required but easily answered by the user).

I just frown at the idea that a *user* file is edited by anyone else
than the user, explicitly.

> The end result seems at least as user-friendly, except perhaps in a few
> degenerate cases. What am I missing?

It's not user friendly to go edit the user file from a program in my
book.  Like not at all.

Regards,
-- 
dim