Stefano,
Can you say how you plan to build this FOM? You've specified what is needed, but
not _how_ you think it should be done.
Is it possible that others could help, and thus get it done quicker? Especially if you
say
how it should be done.
Regards, Upayavira
On 16 Jun 2003 at 17:23, Reinhar
> From: Stefano Mazzocchi
> Chris suggests we release 2.1 without bothering the FOM because it
> will need time to adjust anyway. I agree, but what really worries me
> is the fact that we *already* know it's going to change radically and
> releasing such a bad contract is not going to be good
Although I think Stefano and Ricardo's design overall seems pretty good
I think it will take some time to implement, test, debug, and document.
Therefore I think we should ship 2.1 while we continue to develop
flowscript. I think it will take more than one release to stabilize its
design, anyw
Upayavira wrote:
> > I think its refactoring and adding some functionality. As a starting
> > point you can look at this thread:
> > http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?t=10540178951&r=1&w=2
>
> I remember reading that. What I wanted to know is exactly how one
> would go about
> updating the FOM.
> > > AFAIK, the only real thing missing for 2.1 is the FOM
> > > implementation. The question is now, is someone already working on
> > > it resp. should we wait for the release until it's finished?
> >
> > What is actually required to fix the FOM implementation? Is it just
> > refactoring some o
