On Sun, 26 Mar 2000, Greg Stein wrote: > This is a great start. I have two comments: > > 1) keep it *very* shallow. depth just makes it conceptually difficult. I tried, and Ping shallowed it even more. BTW: Anyone who cares to comment, please comment on Ping's last suggestion. I pretty much agree with the changes he made. > 2) you're pushing too hard. modules do not *have* to go into a package. > there are some placements that you've made which are very > questionable... it appears they are done for movement's sake rather > than for being "right" Well, I'm certainly sorry I gave that impression -- the reason I wans't "right" wasn't that, it was more my desire to be "fast" -- I wanted to have some proposal out the door, since it is harder to argue about something concrete. The biggest prrof of concept that we all agree is that no one seriously took objections to anything -- there were just some minor nits to pick. -- Moshe Zadka <mzadka@geocities.com>. http://www.oreilly.com/news/prescod_0300.html http://www.linux.org.il -- we put the penguin in .com
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4