Why isn't DSSS ('s net portion) more widely used?

[Gregor Richards]

Pragma wrote:
> Lars Ivar Igesund wrote:
>> Pragma wrote:
>>
>>> I'm still finding it hard to develop reasonably complex DSSS scripts 
>>> only
>>> because there's only one possible mode of
>>> testing them: net install.  There's no option to execute dsss.conf from
>>> the filesystem (via "-file <filename>" or
>>> somesuch), so I can't test my dsss.conf file out locally before exposing
>>> it to the world (unless I'm mistaken).  IMO, that's a big problem.
>>
>> Why can't you use "dsss build" and "dsss install" ?
>>
> 
> Hrm... maybe I missed an update somewhere along the way.  Does it still 
> look only in the current path, or can you specify a path for the 
> dsss.conf file via those two methods?
> 

Yes, it still only looks in the current path. I haven't added your -file 
option for two reasons:
     1) I have no idea why it's supposed to be useful.
     2) Nobody else has asked for it.

No wait, three reasons:
     3) It becomes very ambiguous if you have a subdirectory with its 
own dsss.conf file: Then you have to answer the question "Should it look 
at that dsss.conf file, or one relative to the -file provided one?" And 
whichever way I answer that, 50% of the people who use this feature will 
think my answer is wrong. Hell, I'll think my own answer is wrong.

No! Four reasons:
     4) Having the dsss.conf file next to the source just makes sense. 
While /allowing/ it to be elsewhere is hardly /forcing/ it to be 
elsewhere, it does encourage confusion. I'd hate to see people go "well, 
I'm not sure how to integrate my Windows-only dsss.conf and my 
GNU/Linux-only dsss.conf (using version() blocks is soooooooooo 
confusing), so I'll just require you to run dsss build -file 
dsssConfDir/windows/dsss.conf"

And, I completely fail to understand how "have to modify the dsss.conf 
file in place" leads to "can't test it before exposing it to the world."

  - Gregor Richards