Comment 13 for bug 167419

> from what I understood from the code, the intention
> was to make them behave as a clone.

Yes, you are correct, AFAIU the intention for linked offsets was and still is to behave the same as clones.

My comment was just an initial reaction/opinion to the change from a user's perspective (i.e. accommodated to the current behavior and the difference to clones, and maybe under the impression that other issues (related or not) with linked offsets seem more or as important than correcting the default behavior). Sorry to not have been more clear about this.

Related reports (again from a user's perspective - I can't tell what it entails code-wise):

Bug #184341 “Linked offsets ignore clone movement preferences”
duplicate

Bug #239297 “problem duplicating groups of objects with clones and linked offsets”
Only implemented for clones, but not yet for linked offsets (often seen questions about this if e.g. linked offsets had been used to style text on web buttons: the labels of duplicates of the buttons haven't been editable properly because the linked offset still linked to the old text. Current state requires the user to either redo the labels, or edit the links in the XML Editor).

Bug #239430 “linked offset ungroup issue”
needs further testing with current trunk + your patch

Bug #389887 “A linked offset does not follow its source if that source is in another group”
needs further testing with current trunk + your patch