On 3/28/06, Jon A. Cruz <jon@...18...> wrote:
Again, the mechanism here is a temporary kludge.
There's a saying in Russian, "There's nothing so permanent as something temporary."
Honestly, the amount of work and elaboration you're putting into these "kludges" worries me. If you spend so much time on it, why not make it a permanent, well-thought-out, well-named and well-documented feature?
I think that kludges should be avoided in general, but a kludge may be acceptable to commit into the trunk if it is small, very isolated, and very easy to replace with something better. I may be wrong, but what you describe here sounds like it's way too complex and deeply embedded for a kludge. I'm afraid it might stay that way for much longer than anyone anticipates, keeping to annoy us (me, at least) with its kludginess.
Just like that "eek-" class name you committed more than a year ago. The joke has long since worn out, but it is still there as a stupid eyesore.
Sorry if I sounded harsh, but I'm genuinely worried.
-- bulia byak Inkscape. Draw Freely. http://www.inkscape.org