On Tue, Sep 18, 2007 at 10:53:51PM +0200, Andre Poenitz wrote: > On Tue, Sep 18, 2007 at 10:55:51PM +0300, Martin Vermeer wrote: > > On Tue, Sep 18, 2007 at 02:26:32PM -0400, Richard Heck wrote: > > > Andre Poenitz wrote: > > > >On Tue, Sep 18, 2007 at 07:40:35PM +0200, Alfredo Braunstein wrote: > > > > > > > >>This "flex" name is sort of uninformative. What about calling them > > > >>"soft" insets (as in soft-coded vs. hard-coded)? > > > >> > > > >It's as uninformative. > > > > > > > Martin changed it from InsetCharStyle because they'd become more > > > general. Anyway, it's not used in the layout files, just in the code. As > > > far as layout is concerned, there are still charstyles, and now there > > > are also "custom" insets. > > > >Andre' > > > > > > > > Actually I toyed with the name 'soft', but wasn't sure. Then I asked if > > anybody had a better idea than 'flex'. Nobody responded. > > > > Changing the codebase over to flex lasted several days. Nobody had a > > problem with the name. Of course we can change it again, at the cost > > of recompiling lots of code by all developers -- but this time somebody > > else may do it ;-/ > > Just leave it as it is. People will get used to it. > > Andre'
;-) - Martin
