[mkgmap-dev] Shouldn't both options --gmapi and --nsis imply --tdbfile?

Sun Feb 10 14:28:10 GMT 2019

>I still don't dare to change the option handling in mkgmap completely. My
understanding is that we have two groups of users:
>- One large group uses mkgmap since long and has all kinds of scripts which
expect exactly the current behaviour.
>Thus I consider backward compatibility very important.
>- One small group (the newbies) try to create a map on their own and those
are lost with all the options needed to get a good map.
>I think those users would also not profit if we suddenly change all kinds
of defaults because they will find even more confusing >hints and howtos.

I don't agree with that at all. I am a long standing user who uses scripts
and options files to build my map, but still think we should be aiming to
improve the user interface which is pretty hostile to new users. Adding new
functionality without rationalising any of the existing interface generally
makes it even more complicated for newbies. All that is needed is that
changes need to be staged such they are backward compatible for a time with
a clear statement that a certain option is deprecated and is due be
removed/changed, then later this is followed up with another statement and
the actual removal. Changing my script to use a new or changed option takes
a matter of moments. Changing of defaults can be handled in a similar way.
Initially send out a note saying the default will change, indicating that
any scripts may need to explicitly specify the option. If a user has got to
the stage where he has developed a script to generate their map, then they
must know what they are doing, and it will not take much effort to tweak the
script when an occasional user interface change comes along. I don't think
there is any suggestion that there will be so many changes to the interface
that it would become painful, and the occasional change seems to me a very
small price to pay for improving the usability for new users.

Regards,
Mike