Roy T. Fielding wrote:
Small note - some of the participants on the [EMAIL PROTECTED] are
discussing the actual requirements - which from my (and other) point(s)
of view go beyond a file-system http protocol cut-and-dried
implementation
solution. Some consider this area to be much more than an
On Sat, 2003-11-08 at 21:47, Stephen McConnell wrote:
Roy T. Fielding wrote:
Small note - some of the participants on the [EMAIL PROTECTED] are
discussing the actual requirements - which from my (and other) point(s)
of view go beyond a file-system http protocol cut-and-dried
On Sun, 2003-11-09 at 00:35, Stephen McConnell wrote:
Jason:
I must confess that I am intrigued by your approach to collaboration!
That's because you're at least as deficient as I am in the realm of
collaboration. Neither you or I are any great shining examples of an
ideal collaborator.
It is usually unwise to mix insults with requests. However,
the point of collaboration is not to obtain the civility of a
collegial discussion over tea; the point is to accomplish the
task. Continual discussion of issues that are not relevant to
the task being collaborated upon is not
Neither you or I are any great shining examples of an
ideal collaborator. You'll have to bear with me while
I try to make ammends. I will try to bear with you.
Let take this at face value: someone admitting to faults, pledging to
improve, asking for allowances while making even more mistakes
Roy T. Fielding wrote:
It is about safe downloading of dependencies from a virtual
repository that extends across mirrored systems on a heterogeneous,
multi-organizational network. The underlying infrastructure is
going to be file based because it will be replicated with rsync.
I sure as hell
Noel J. Bergman wrote:
My idea of collaboration is something *totally* different.
It sure can be once you get rid of anyone who doesn't agree with you.
Neither of you has the most perfect record on collaboration. Fine. Please
drop it and focus on the actual task to be addressed. Sniping at
