Peter, this is not about the question whether I disagree with the assessment. You might be right, you might be wrong. I can't tell, yet, because I'm still working my way into the new layout engine. My reaction was triggered by the way you said these things, not by any technical statement. But as I said, I may be overreacting and I may not have filtered everything through all the "is-written" and "is-in-foreign-language" filters.
On 17.01.2005 12:07:47 Peter B. West wrote: > Jeremias, > > Do you disagree with the assessment? Clearly people might, but I didn't > say anything I don't believe is the truth about the state of FOP. If it > is true, isn't it fair to let newcomers know the state of play? Finn > has already talked about a radically different approach in order to > solve the large files problem, and I'm sure he will present you with a > swag of patches to do just that at some time in the future. I just hope > he doesn't do it so soon as to render Defoe moot. One of its underlying > features will be what is effectively a stream parsing mechanism. It's > acceptance, which I take to be a fait accompli, there being no other > design contenders, will be particularly galling for me, in light of the > the blanket refusal to consider it when I proposed it, as I still do. > > I think I have earned the right to speak my mind on these issues. > > Peter > > Jeremias Maerki wrote: > > Peter, > > > > it's ok if you make other people aware of your project but the way you > > did that in your last post disturbs me. We know that you disagree with > > FOP's approach, but I would have preferred a more constructive form of > > making Mark aware of Defoe. Maybe I'm overreacting... > > Jeremias Maerki
