johnf wrote:
> Sorry Nate I disagree with respect of extending AppWizard.  I would like to 
> see the AppWizard dropped.  Let me say I use AppWizard everytime I want to 
> test the data interfaces but that's all.  

I believe Nate was suggesting documenting AppWizard, for the purpose of 
telling of its strengths and weaknesses. To summarize the various 
viewpoints as I see them (people can correct me if I have it wrong):

Paul: Keep AppWizard as-is, get it documented
Ed: Eventually extend AppWizard to cdxml; get it documented
Nate: Get it documented
John: Drop AppWizard
Carl: Make it into something better, faster, stronger. Extend!

I don't understand wanting to drop something that *at least* lets you 
test data interfaces, and *at most* gives you a skeleton for a 
highly-scalable application. I do understand the benefits of getting it 
documented, so it can be seen in its proper context vis-a-vis Dabo itself.

-- 
pkm ~ http://paulmcnett.com


_______________________________________________
Post Messages to: [email protected]
Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/dabo-dev

Reply via email to