Hehe does sound like a dilbert scenario..
Funniest dilbert I've seen is the one where the boss dude rox up to dilbert and shows him the software box and describes how it will look on the shelf etc, and dilbert raises the point "but we don't have the software finished yet" - boss replies "did I not show you the box..."
Point is, leave the complex details to us the programmers and simply pat the "boss" on the head and express a "job well done sir"..
Hehe
Scott.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Sean Corfield
> Sent: Wednesday, 12 January 2005 5:47 PM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [CFCDev] implicit invocation security concerns
>
> On Tue, 11 Jan 2005 16:02:16 -0600, Joe Ferraro
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > A client of mine said that he was concerned with Mach-ii because he
> > was worried about implicit invocation security concerns.
>
> Ah, a Pointy-Haired Client :)
> --
> Sean A Corfield -- http://www.corfield.org/ Team Fusebox --
> http://www.fusebox.org/ Breeze Me! --
> http://www.corfield.org/breezeme Got Gmail? -- I have 5
> invites to give away!
>
> "If you're not annoying somebody, you're not really alive."
> -- Margaret Atwood
> ----------------------------------------------------------
> You are subscribed to cfcdev. To unsubscribe, send an email
> to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the words 'unsubscribe cfcdev'
> in the message of the email.
>
> CFCDev is run by CFCZone (www.cfczone.org) and supported by
> Mindtool, Corporation (www.mindtool.com).
>
> An archive of the CFCDev list is available at
> www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]
>
