Horst Herb wrote: > On Monday 16 October 2006 08:55, Oliver Frank wrote: > >> How do you mean, you "would not would not support online claiming in the >> first instance"? Do you mean that you are philosophically opposed to >> it? If so, why? Or is there some other reason that you would not >> support it? >> > > I think he means that in the first implementation it would be too much work; > we get non-online billing running first because this is what most of us (?) > do, and then worry about online billing in a separate project > > I think we should now focus on getting something working *quick* that covers > most needs, and then bolt the extra bells and whistles on afterwards. > > No problem as long as the general architecture allows this easily enough > Yes. We should walk before we run ... crawl actually.
David
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
_______________________________________________ Gpcg_talk mailing list [email protected] http://ozdocit.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gpcg_talk
