From: Jonathan Gordon <jdgordy_at_gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2011 16:22:46 +1000

I'm happy to talk about technical issues...

On 26 September 2011 16:15, Amaury Pouly <amaury.pouly_at_gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi All,
>>
>> > Furthermore this user setting is implemented in a totally obscure way (a
>> > magic file containing a magic number, which isn't checked if it's even
>> > plausible). It's pattern that doesn't exist yet, while there's a clear
>> > existing implementation of user settings. It's rather hidden without a
>> > chance to be discovered by the user. I don't think I need to mention
>> > that the manual doesn't tell anything about this.
>
> I don't like the way this "setting" is implemented, we have a framework for
> that and see no good reason to not use ot.
>
> Regards
>

It doesnt really sit well with the current setting system, and I need
to double check settings are loaded early enough (which is mostly the
reason I did it this way). I'll have another look though as yes if it
can use config.cfg it would be better.
Received on 2011-09-26