Re: background/font capplets

[Luis Villa <louie ximian com>]

On Wed, 2002-03-13 at 10:26, jacob berkman wrote:
> On Wed, 2002-03-13 at 08:36, Luis Villa wrote:
> > On Tue, 2002-03-12 at 23:38, Seth Nickell wrote:
> > > Because the rewrite was done more than a month and a half ago.
> > 
> > I didn't really intend to get myself involved in what could turn into
> > something nasty :/ but from the perspective of releasing and testing it
> > doesn't matter when it was written, only when it was released to
> > testers.
> 
> the rationale is at the beginning of the thread.
> 
> basically havoc saying, the bg crapplet sucks and we have this better
> one, why are we shooting ourselves in the foot by not using it?

Yeah, except it only sucks from a UI perspective. It works, and is
basically bug-free, which (I guarantee) is more than we can say for
anything that is a complete rewrite at this point. The idea of
introducing a large new crop of bugs^H^H^H^Hfeatures at this point is
extremely bothersome to me. Obviously, I can't stop anyone, and I do
like the idea of making the UI suck less, but I really don't like the
precedent of taking proven, working code out and putting new, untested
code in at this very late point in the release process, no matter how
sucky the UI is, as long as it works (which, AFAICT it does, despite the
suckiness.)

Luis