Mark Brownell wrote:
I agree that it's bad practice to draw attention to what you use in a defensive way or in
criticizing other well known methods. I also see the logic in not using name overloading
when describing RR, Rev, and Revolution as being a trinity of modern symbolism. I always
ask, "what would you like it written in?"
How about "Runtime Revolution" the company, "RevEngine" the IDE, and "Rv+" the
language?
You can say what ever you want to even if they don't in Scotland. You could just say
"that's what we say in the community."
"The community"... the fact that there IS a community is key. I think
one of the most pressing concerns among business folks who pay the bill
for us to develop their apps in Rev is one of continuity. As a client of
mine said last week:
Suppose you decided to chuck it all and join a country band in
Nashville, never to return to your former life and donating all
material possessions to your daughter. What would I do? We are
standing naked here (an ugly thought at best).
Since there is a Rev developer community, project continuity is
achievable even if some developers disappear. I was able to talk my
client down from the ledge (metaphorically) on that basis.
--
Phil Davis
PDS Labs
Professional Software Development
http://pdslabs.net
_______________________________________________
use-revolution mailing list
[email protected]
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
