No, a Jallib reference needs to be separate. Also IMO the libraries, even with current style rules need to be re-organised. I've had a bit of a look at this in CatPad project.
On Apr 1, 4:23 pm, mattschinkel <[email protected]> wrote: > > I am also interested in a Jallib complete library reference, should > this be in the same book? > > Matt. > > On Apr 1, 4:09 am, Sebastien Lelong <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > Hi Chief Editor, > > > 2010/4/1 vasile surducan <[email protected]> > > > > However, the "jallib group" is an entity which doesn't written a word on > > > the original pjal documentation. So maybe keeping the title and the main > > > authors as is, should be a good idea and put somewhere the jallib logo > > > (BTW, > > > someday my daughter ask me the copyrights incomes, when she draw it has 9 > > > or > > > 10 if I remember well and now has 19). > > > So, should we change logo ? Maybe we could organize a contest ? > > > Cheers, > > Seb -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "jallib" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/jallib?hl=en.
