Re: Enable extcap by default or not

[Alexis La Goutte <alexis.lagoutte () gmail com>]

I prefer disable by default (to avoid a lot of interface)

But add a advanced option/tab is also a good idea
or add on list interface a button to enable extcap

After don't forget when a preference is enable, the setting is kept (only
need to enable extcap for the first start...)

Cheers

On Fri, Sep 9, 2016 at 9:53 AM, Roland Knall <rknall () gmail com> wrote:

> On Fri, Sep 9, 2016 at 8:16 AM, Graham Bloice <graham.bloice () trihedral com
> > wrote:
>
> > >
> > I vote for disable by default, I feel that the extcap interfaces are
> > superfluous and confusing to most of the users I support as they are for
> > "niche" purposes.
> >
> > I don't follow the argument that a user actually needing an extcap
> > interface for their "niche" purpose will find enabling it at all
> > difficult.  If this is felt to be an issue, why not add a top-level menu
> > for extcaps to make their control easier?
>
>
> A lot of users on my end (around 100 people use the provided extcap at the
> moment) use Wireshark for capturing and first-glance analysis. They expect
> the interfaces just to be there, and would default to the built-in
> interfaces, which would lead to wrong captures and results. I agree, that
> we have now a lot of special extcap interfaces, but I would have to side
> with Dario here, it should be the role of the utility to present
> possibilities. Otherwise only guys specifically looking for some issues
> will find it, and not everyone will use it.
>
> In my opinion it is more of a question on how to present interfaces to the
> end-user. Would it not make more sense, to change the way interfaces are
> shown, instead of hiding them as default? For instance, a "Recent" or
> "Common" tab and an advanced tab in the interface list would make much more
> sense. Also adding favorite interfaces to a short-list.
>
> If the major consensus is hiding extcap default interfaces, I'll
> grudgingly commit to it ;-), but it will present some issues at my end and
> there will be a lot of users, never using the feature in the first place.
>
> Roland
>
>
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> _______________
> Sent via:    Wireshark-dev mailing list <wireshark-dev () wireshark org>
> Archives:    https://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev
> Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev
>              mailto:wireshark-dev-request () wireshark org?subject=
> unsubscribe
___________________________________________________________________________
Sent via:    Wireshark-dev mailing list <wireshark-dev () wireshark org>
Archives:    https://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev
Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev
             mailto:wireshark-dev-request () wireshark org?subject=unsubscribe