Moshe Zadka writes: > 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. It's *really easy* to argue about something concrete. ;) It's just harder to misunderstand the specifics of the proposal. It's too early to say what people think; not enough people have had time to look at the proposals yet. On the other hand, I think its great -- that we have a proposal to discuss. I'll make my comments after I've read through the last version posted when I have time to read these. -Fred -- Fred L. Drake, Jr. <fdrake at acm.org> Corporation for National Research Initiatives
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