On 25 November 2010 07:58, Bryan Tong Minh <bryan.tongminh(a)gmail.com> wrote:
I think you are taking the wrong approach here,
altough I agree with
MZMcBride's reply to your mail "From a social and technical
perspective, this proposal is horribly hackish. [...] Given the
current parameters, this is probably the best solution. [...]"
The rock and hard place here are:
1. This solution is horribly hacky and bletcherous.
2. The ideal is the enemy of the actually adequate; at present things
are not adequate.
Do we have a clear picture of what the ideal looks like? Are the hacks
clearly on the path to that and not to obstruct it in any way?
- d.