Matt Todd wrote:
> [Lots of stuff]
General comment: It's much easier to comprehend posts in mail lists or
reading through the archives if you quote something of what you're
responding to.
> Now, to the requirements talk: how important is the availability of
> revision history in this bare-b
> From: Michael Mathews [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Having just been away on yet /another/ training course in Agile
> methodology, I'd say this is a classic disconnect of concerns.
> Sounds
> like Conrad just want something that works, and can be available
> quickly -- a rather traditional customer
I'll be honest and say that I'm not too concerned with the
prize/grant, so that may be the reason I want to go beyond that
minimal ideal. I'm specifically concerned with a poorly designed (or
at least slightly clumsy to upgrade) wiki, all in for the sake of
speed, minimal functionality, and money.
On 11/06/06, Matt Todd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
2) I agree that it is both important and pertinent to get the general
requirements down for the project, but I do see a need and a benefit
to having the architecture forming in the meanwhile. I see how these
things can be connected, obviously, bu
1) Understood. I've been disconnected from Perl for a while, and this
is really the first time I've been participating in the Perl
community. Thanks for the heads-up. :)
2) I agree that it is both important and pertinent to get the general
requirements down for the project, but I do see a need an
