Il giorno gio, 06/03/2008 alle 09.17 -0600, Matthew Nuzum ha scritto:
> On Thu, Mar 6, 2008 at 9:06 AM, Troy James Sobotka
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > >> > Patch the code. Kludge it out when we have no other option. Let the
> > >> > progression happen.
> > >
> > > In short, it isn't r
perhaps given a little guidance... No one's hand is being held to
> the fire to install them.
>
> -wes
>
>
>
>
> ______
>
> > Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2008 09:17:54 -0600
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > To: ubuntu-art@lists.ubuntu.com
> > Subject: Re: [ub
m.
-wes
> Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2008 09:17:54 -0600> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]> To:
> ubuntu-art@lists.ubuntu.com> Subject: Re: [ubuntu-art] Hacking / Kludging -
> WAS Re: gtk theme> > On Thu, Mar 6, 2008 at 9:06 AM, Troy James Sobotka>
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wro
> Date: Thu, 06 Mar 2008 07:06:46 -0800
> From: Troy James Sobotka <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: [ubuntu-art] Hacking / Kludging - WAS Re: gtk theme
>
> It certainly isn't optimal, and I am well aware of the shortcomings.
> The point isn't to kludge / hac
On Thu, Mar 6, 2008 at 9:06 AM, Troy James Sobotka
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >> > Patch the code. Kludge it out when we have no other option. Let the
> >> > progression happen.
> >
> > In short, it isn't really perfectionism (well, a bit...), but it's
> > more a matter of maintainability.
>> > Patch the code. Kludge it out when we have no other option. Let the
>> > progression happen.
> (First post here. I'd like to say hi! :D) I don't know if I'm in any
> position to say this, but if you do things in a hackish way, you do
> advance, but at the expense of having more and more
