Nate Lowrie wrote:
> On 12/18/06, johnf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On Monday 18 December 2006 11:16, Paul McNett wrote:
>>> 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 by no means said extend the App Wizard.  I was referring to a
> tutorial about taking an App that starts in App Wizard and then
> delving into the code to change the standard interface to reflect the
> individuals needs.  It was suggested as a resource for
> programming/dabo newbies who gained experience and want to take and
> customize programs that they may have used the App Wizard to create
> back when they didn't know anything else.
> 
> I have tested out the App Wizard a grand total of 3 times so far.  I
> don't use it for production projects.  It is nice for some things but
> I have to side with Ed on the point of it being misused and
> misrepresented as the do-everything-for-you,
> this-is-the-only-thing-that-dabo-is application by people that don't
> have enough programming experience to know any better.

I'm not picking on you, but it seems that there are some assumptions 
going around that, as far as I know, aren't really substantiated by 
evidence:

+ That the AppWizard is misrepresented as a do-it-all, or that the 
AppWizard *is* Dabo. If it is misrepresented as that, please provide 
citations.

+ That the AppWizard is being misused. We need a definition for 
"misused" and examples of such misuse cited.

These would be great starting points for the tutorial on AppWizard, if 
substantiated.

-- 
pkm ~ http://paulmcnett.com


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

Reply via email to