>> > 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 unmaintainable > code. Sure, we'll go forward, but it will take more and more work to > move any further. Put more hacks, and the code starts to become too > much of a mess to even touch. (I don't have a good example here, > though.) > > In short, it isn't really perfectionism (well, a bit...), but it's > more a matter of maintainability. It certainly isn't optimal, and I am well aware of the shortcomings. The point isn't to kludge / hack _everything_, but do it where it is required to achieve an innovation. Animated progressbars might be an example here. Our track record for doing things _before_ other competing operating systems do something is not exactly stellar. Putting in a kludge / hack accomplishes two things: 1) It clearly demonstrates the shortcoming in the current code set. 2) Puts a little more pressure on the architecture to evolve _properly_. Heck. If it weren't for the kludges and hacks here and there, with the respective sarcastic comments in the code, where would FOSS be at all? Sincerely, TJS
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
-- ubuntu-art mailing list ubuntu-art@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-art
