Change to README ought to be reverted

[jerry gay]

On Tue, Jul 26, 2011 at 19:27, Moritz Lenz <moritz at faui2k3.org> wrote:
> On 07/27/2011 02:33 AM, James E Keenan wrote:
>> I object to this change for two reasons.
>>
>> First, on one platform I use, Parrot does not PASS 'make test' when I
>> configure with '--optimize'.
>
> So there's a bug, and it must be fixed. If the fix isn't easy, I'm fine
> with documenting the lack of '--optimize' as a workaround for that platform.
> I don't see why a platform-specific bug should mean we should recommend
> our users a slow parrot by default. I don't think slow-by-default does
> parrot any good. I'd go so far as to actually make --optimize the
> default for Configure.pl.
>
>> Second, I think a change in our README about how our users ought to
>> start out building Parrot really warrants more discussion than what
>> little I could find on #parrot today.
>
> I don't see how the need for more discussion should prevent a gradual
> improvement.
>
>> It appears to have been a
>> spur-of-the-moment decision.  I think this should have been a Trac
>> ticket with type RFC.
>>
>> I would really like to see this reverted until we can discuss it more
>> thoroughly.
>
> If you feel strongly, feel free to revert that commit, but as I argued
> above, I can't see the reason behind either of your points.
>
if, as you argue, it should be the default, why must it be specified
as an option?

parrot users deserve better; parrot developers should do work with
users in mind rather than asking them to do it. don't make users
deviate from the norm in order to get normal behavior.

~jerry