Sam Darwin via Mailman-users writes:
- "list default".
- "default processing'.
and "member default".
Three different names, just as "Samuel Darwin" is a different name from "Charles Darwin".
I would just think "Ok, clearly that's the default. Look at the name there. Default processing. The default."
"The" default? There's a cascade of options that are controlled by subscribers, owners, and site admins, with the lower level option values becoming defaults for the upper levels. And there's a side cascade of defaults for subscribers: user-wide defaults, address-wide defaults, and the per-subscription option values.
But if you name both of your sons "Michael" even though you understand they are separate people, it causes headaches.
Sure, but as shown above we didn't. I really don't think this is going to be a common problem. You seem to attach a connotation of uniqueness to the word "default". It simply doesn't apply to the cascade of defaults Mailman uses, while most Mailman administrators and subscribers seem to understand this aspect of how Mailman works.
So ask the question is "default processing" the only compelling name for that functionality?
That's not a useful question to the developers, though. What we ask are, "Are there better names for that functionality?" (arguable) and "Are any sufficiently compelling to warrant a change?" (not to me).
Why use it again?
- Because the functionality is a default in a cascade of defaults.
- Because at the level the issue presented itself, it's what people *should* use in the absence of a specific reason for using one of the other options.
- Because it's already there and at least 35 people are involved in changing it, it's not obvious that the change will be easy for all of them, and it's likely the changes will spill over to several more files, mostly unidentified at this point.
Abstract arguments supported by only one person's experience won't overcome the third point for me, so until you do address that point or a few folks chime in to agree that this is confusing[1], I'm out of this thread.
Footnotes: [1] I hope those who do agree will speak up. There's an awful lot of individual opinion about language flying around here. "Disagree" is not so useful since it appears that's the developers' bias anyway and we don't need a pile-on, but you all are welcome too. :-) Especially if you report similar but different issues, as we've already seen.
-- GNU Mailman consultant (installation, migration, customization) Sirius Open Source https://www.siriusopensource.com/ Software systems consulting in Europe, North America, and Japan