I think the way Hal does it is just fine, why make things harder than they
have to be? Not only that its been tested and found successful in not only
real world projects with and without remote developers working with them.
Fred T. Sanders
Charlottesville, VA
-------------------------------------------
It compiled with no errors! Ship it.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Chris Lott" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, September 16, 2000 12:45 PM
Subject: Re: FuseDoc specification
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Has there been any progress on reaching a consensus for a fusedoc
> specification? I've tried out Lee Bokman's FusionDocs tool and I like
> it. But I would like to be able to choose something for my first
> "real" fusebox project that was at least somewhat standard...
>
> Are the paths started by Hal Helms and continued by so many others in
> this thread (which seemed to disappear some time back) going to come
> together?
>
> c
> - --
> Chris Lott [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: PGP 6.5.8 for message encryption and authentication: USE PGP!
> Comment: PGP KeyID: 0x51046CFD
>
> iQA/AwUBOcOjjNaLYehRBGz9EQL5ugCfeQy3EkisyYsGA1CGDTfiVhQ8IlUAoMAo
> eYfobSRVkAWMuT+SYBY6rEcB
> =3MUe
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
> To Unsubscribe visit
http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists&body=lists/fusebox or
send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with 'unsubscribe' in
the body.
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
To Unsubscribe visit
http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists&body=lists/fusebox or send a
message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with 'unsubscribe' in the body.
