tiny_mce for me too... > Send Webobjects-dev mailing list submissions to > [email protected] > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > http://lists.apple.com/mailman/listinfo/webobjects-dev > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > You can reach the person managing the list at > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > than "Re: Contents of Webobjects-dev digest..." > > Today's Topics: > > 1. Decisions, decisions... (Logiciels Malus Softwares) > 2. HTML Text Editor (Colin Shreffler) > 3. Re: Decisions, decisions... (Ken Anderson) > 4. Re: HTML Text Editor (Geoff Hopson) > 5. Re: Decisions, decisions... (Andrus Adamchik) > 6. Re: How many is too many instances? ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) > 7. Re: HTML Text Editor (Guido Neitzer) > 8. Re: How many is too many instances? (Jerry W. Walker) > 9. [OT?]Help needed with data access MS SQL Server > 2005/EOModeler (Ute Hoffmann) > 10. RE: [OT?]Help needed with data access MS SQL Server > 2005/EOModeler (Ruenagel, Frank) > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 15:05:43 -0500 > From: Logiciels Malus Softwares <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Decisions, decisions... > To: [email protected] > Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed > > Hi! > > I'm new to this list, and I have been looking for a "good excuse" to > do WO development for a while... Now I have this project that looks > like a good candidate, but I have been asked to compare WO with > PHP... I know, I know, not the same beast, and though both are > fruits, one is an apple and the other one is an orange. However, I do > have to compare... And therein lies my problem: I can not, for the > love of me, come to a decision? (Obviously I am biased since I ask > here, though... : ) ) > > What we are looking at here is a website with forums, file exchange, > mass-mailing functionality, and a very, very basic text-editor. > That's for the first couple of phases. Then.. .Who knows. But it's > basically an enhanced online community. We are probably going to have > about 2000 users. > > Now, I know PHP can probably do all that, and the community is _huge_ > with a lot of libraries and all that. I'm a little concerned about > some of PHP's shortcomings (those I have found discussed on the web) > like lower security, not being too friendly with teams of developers; > though I will only be the only programmer for now, I can see this > becoming a 2-3 programmers project in the future. And I really like > to be able to extract the logic from the web pages. (I know I can do > that with Smarty in PHP) On a totally personnal note, I'm more > confident with Obj-C or Java than C/C++ at this point (my C++ is > really rusty) and I understand if I ever need to develop "plug-ins" > or "extras" in PHP, it's C/C++... > > On the other hand, WO feels like it's just a bit too big for this > project; I know the learning curve will be steeper, but I am counting > on long term gains in maintenance... The other thing against WO is > that, right now, it would mean buying it - my thoughts were to buy a > Mac Mini, install Mac OS X server on there, and host it at > macminicolo or something... But, it would mean $$$ in the short term. > The other concern was that it would be easier to find PHP coders if/ > when we need help, than WO coders... Though since WO is Java, I guess > it's not such a good argument after all... > > Sooooo, I'm all mixed up! I _want_ the answer to be WO ; ) but I just > can't in good faith find a valid, solid argument (or even better: > "set of arguments") to tip the scale in WO's favor... Since for this > kind of project, it feels like PHP might be very capable, cheaper and > allow us to grow the team over time... > > Anybody has any thoughts on this? > > Thanks! > > Jean > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 2 > Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 14:15:50 -0700 > From: Colin Shreffler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: HTML Text Editor > To: "WebObjects (Group)" <[email protected]> > Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > > Can anyone recommend a good HTML/Rich Text Editor that integrates well with > with web objects? > > I basically need to provider my users with the ability to format text to be > displayed within an intranet application. > > Cheers > -c > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: > http://lists.apple.com/pipermail/webobjects-dev/attachments/20060128/e9e9ad48/attachment.html > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 3 > Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 16:30:12 -0500 > From: Ken Anderson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Re: Decisions, decisions... > To: Logiciels Malus Softwares <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Cc: [email protected] > Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed > > How many of those 2000 users will be concurrent? If the answer is > more than around 50, I think performance will answer your question. > WO will beat the pants off PHP with a lot of users. My guess is your > hardware costs will get quite high with a PHP based solution, where a > maxed out xServe will probably handle hundreds of users before > getting bogged down. > > In terms of cost, WO is part of the standard development package now > - no extra cost. If you mean hardware cost, wouldn't you have to buy > something to run the PHP site on? > > Ken > > On Jan 28, 2006, at 3:05 PM, Logiciels Malus Softwares wrote: > > > Hi! > > > > I'm new to this list, and I have been looking for a "good excuse" > > to do WO development for a while... Now I have this project that > > looks like a good candidate, but I have been asked to compare WO > > with PHP... I know, I know, not the same beast, and though both are > > fruits, one is an apple and the other one is an orange. However, I > > do have to compare... And therein lies my problem: I can not, for > > the love of me, come to a decision? (Obviously I am biased since I > > ask here, though... : ) ) > > > > What we are looking at here is a website with forums, file > > exchange, mass-mailing functionality, and a very, very basic text- > > editor. That's for the first couple of phases. Then.. .Who knows. > > But it's basically an enhanced online community. We are probably > > going to have about 2000 users. > > > > Now, I know PHP can probably do all that, and the community is > > _huge_ with a lot of libraries and all that. I'm a little concerned > > about some of PHP's shortcomings (those I have found discussed on > > the web) like lower security, not being too friendly with teams of > > developers; though I will only be the only programmer for now, I > > can see this becoming a 2-3 programmers project in the future. And > > I really like to be able to extract the logic from the web pages. > > (I know I can do that with Smarty in PHP) On a totally personnal > > note, I'm more confident with Obj-C or Java than C/C++ at this > > point (my C++ is really rusty) and I understand if I ever need to > > develop "plug-ins" or "extras" in PHP, it's C/C++... > > > > On the other hand, WO feels like it's just a bit too big for this > > project; I know the learning curve will be steeper, but I am > > counting on long term gains in maintenance... The other thing > > against WO is that, right now, it would mean buying it - my > > thoughts were to buy a Mac Mini, install Mac OS X server on there, > > and host it at macminicolo or something... But, it would mean $$$ > > in the short term. The other concern was that it would be easier to > > find PHP coders if/when we need help, than WO coders... Though > > since WO is Java, I guess it's not such a good argument after all... > > > > Sooooo, I'm all mixed up! I _want_ the answer to be WO ; ) but I > > just can't in good faith find a valid, solid argument (or even > > better: "set of arguments") to tip the scale in WO's favor... Since > > for this kind of project, it feels like PHP might be very capable, > > cheaper and allow us to grow the team over time... > > > > Anybody has any thoughts on this? > > > > Thanks! > > > > Jean > > _______________________________________________ > > Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored. > > Webobjects-dev mailing list ([email protected]) > > Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: > > http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/webobjects-dev/lists% > > 40anderhome.com > > > > This email sent to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 4 > Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 22:02:08 +0000 > From: Geoff Hopson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Re: HTML Text Editor > To: Colin Shreffler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Cc: "WebObjects \(Group\)" <[email protected]> > Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" > > I've been using tiny_mce - works OK for me. > > Geoff > > On 28/01/06, Colin Shreffler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Can anyone recommend a good HTML/Rich Text Editor that integrates well > > with with web objects? > > > > I basically need to provider my users with the ability to format text to > > be displayed within an intranet application. > > > > Cheers > > -c > > _______________________________________________ > > Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored. > > Webobjects-dev mailing list ([email protected]) > > Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: > > > > http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/webobjects-dev/geoff.hopson%40gmail.com > > > > This email sent to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: > http://lists.apple.com/pipermail/webobjects-dev/attachments/20060128/7034ad92/attachment.html > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 5 > Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 18:49:53 -0500 > From: Andrus Adamchik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Re: Decisions, decisions... > To: WebObjects Development <[email protected]> > Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed > > I think you nailed it down yourself pretty well. Add to that what Ken > wrote about performance, and you have the full picture. Now it's up > to you to make a decision. From experience I know it can be hard when > your instincts tell you one thing and the logic of business - the > opposite ;-) > > How I solved it for myself? I cheated by changing the options to > choose from, substituting "WebObjects" with "open source Java > frameworks". With this the only downside of Java compared to PHP > remains the need to run an extra piece of software - Java web > container. Fewer companies host Java than PHP, still on the low end > prices are very reasonable for Java as well ($20-40/month). > > Andrus > > On Jan 28, 2006, at 3:05 PM, Logiciels Malus Softwares wrote: > > Hi! > > > > I'm new to this list, and I have been looking for a "good excuse" > > to do WO development for a while... Now I have this project that > > looks like a good candidate, but I have been asked to compare WO > > with PHP... I know, I know, not the same beast, and though both are > > fruits, one is an apple and the other one is an orange. However, I > > do have to compare... And therein lies my problem: I can not, for > > the love of me, come to a decision? (Obviously I am biased since I > > ask here, though... : ) ) > > > > What we are looking at here is a website with forums, file > > exchange, mass-mailing functionality, and a very, very basic text- > > editor. That's for the first couple of phases. Then.. .Who knows. > > But it's basically an enhanced online community. We are probably > > going to have about 2000 users. > > > > Now, I know PHP can probably do all that, and the community is > > _huge_ with a lot of libraries and all that. I'm a little concerned > > about some of PHP's shortcomings (those I have found discussed on > > the web) like lower security, not being too friendly with teams of > > developers; though I will only be the only programmer for now, I > > can see this becoming a 2-3 programmers project in the future. And > > I really like to be able to extract the logic from the web pages. > > (I know I can do that with Smarty in PHP) On a totally personnal > > note, I'm more confident with Obj-C or Java than C/C++ at this > > point (my C++ is really rusty) and I understand if I ever need to > > develop "plug-ins" or "extras" in PHP, it's C/C++... > > > > On the other hand, WO feels like it's just a bit too big for this > > project; I know the learning curve will be steeper, but I am > > counting on long term gains in maintenance... The other thing > > against WO is that, right now, it would mean buying it - my > > thoughts were to buy a Mac Mini, install Mac OS X server on there, > > and host it at macminicolo or something... But, it would mean $$$ > > in the short term. The other concern was that it would be easier to > > find PHP coders if/when we need help, than WO coders... Though > > since WO is Java, I guess it's not such a good argument after all... > > > > Sooooo, I'm all mixed up! I _want_ the answer to be WO ; ) but I > > just can't in good faith find a valid, solid argument (or even > > better: "set of arguments") to tip the scale in WO's favor... Since > > for this kind of project, it feels like PHP might be very capable, > > cheaper and allow us to grow the team over time... > > > > Anybody has any thoughts on this? > > > > Thanks! > > > > Jean > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 6 > Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2006 11:40:29 +0100 > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: How many is too many instances? > To: WebObjects-Dev <[email protected]> > Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed > > The short answer is "When performance degrades for a given load you > are running too many instances.". When performance degrades, depends > on your particular application & environment. But those are > universal characteristics of any performance problem. Hence the > suggestion about JavaPlaybackManager for simulating client load. > Such a tool could help you determine if your site is limited by CPU, > RAM, or bandwidth. (i.e., where is your bottleneck actually, and can > more instances help that at all?) > > There are any number of tools you can use to simulate client load. > The key is to not let the test tool dictate the test. (i.e., don't > write a bash script that calls curl on the main page just because you > can and it is easy.) But then you would also want to not have too > many scripts resulting ins simple read-only actions, if the reality > is that many people will be writing. Even for the reading actions > you want variety, otherwise you'll be testing the caching of your DB. > > Then there are problems with writes too, are you always writing the > same data (making indexes less effective for queries). Not to > mention the ever present problem of getting a second 'live site' for > testing. You can use 'the' live site at 'night' unless you have > customers around the world. And the problem with your site may have > nothing to do with the number of instances you are running. Testing > on your local developer machine is good enough when you are looking > for large improvements in generation time for a particular page, but > it isn't good for load testing. What makes a page fast on one > platform is likely to help on another. But I wouldn't bet on the > times being the same for both platforms, nor the improvements. > > So if there isn't an answer to the question without load tests, and > (useful) load tests are almost impossible to write/carry out, what to > do? I think you have two thirds of it already. You don't want to > actually run 16 instances with the 4GB, cause you want some left over > for other activities. Basically you want to use so few instances > that your machine doesn't ever swap. For your example, that number > is much lower than 16. You're on track with the CPU bit. I would > wonder where your DB (that I assume you have) is running? If load is > a concern and you want to simplify things then running your DB on a > separate machine may be a good idea. > > Aside from that you can simply monitor your statistics over the long > term and try different configurations. Eventually I bet you find the > number of instances has little effect on the overall performance. > That's the good news and another short answer. > > Am 27.01.2006 um 23:05 schrieb Eric Stewart: > > > How do you know when you are running to many instances of a WO App on > > a given server? > > > > I understand that you obviously can't run more instances than you have > > memory to work with. So if you have 4 GB of memory and your running WO > > Apps consuming 256 MB per app, obviously you can't run more than > > roughly 16 apps. > > > > I realize that the number of processors is also going to play a role > > in this. Just because you have enough memory to run 16 apps doesn't > > mean that's your ceiling. If you have only two processors, then you > > can at most simulateously handle 2 operations. In this case do you > > just monitor your CPU usage and once you start approaching 50-75% CPU > > utilization on a constant basis then you know you are running the max > > number of instances you should be running. > > > > What do you guys who deploy large applications with millions of > > requests per day look for when determining exactly how many instances > > to run on a given server. > > > > Thank you for your time, > > > > Eric Stewart > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > _______________________________________________ > > Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored. > > Webobjects-dev mailing list ([email protected]) > > Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: > > http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/webobjects-dev/white_fish% > > 40mac.com > > > > This email sent to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 7 > Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2006 11:46:48 +0100 > From: Guido Neitzer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Re: HTML Text Editor > To: "WebObjects (Group)" <[email protected]> > Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed > > On 28.01.2006, at 23:02 Uhr, Geoff Hopson wrote: > > > I've been using tiny_mce - works OK for me. > > Same here. > > cug > > -- > PharmaLine, Essen, GERMANY > Software and Database Development > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 8 > Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2006 08:54:15 -0500 > From: "Jerry W. Walker" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Re: How many is too many instances? > To: Eric Stewart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Cc: WebObjects-Dev <[email protected]> > Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed > > Hi, Eric, > > I would rephrase your question from "How do you know when you are > running too many instances..." to "How do you know when you are > running enough instances..." > > If one presumes that "too many" instances of a WOApp is one more than > "enough" instances, these could be said to be the same question. The > more general question underlying both of these, however, is how do > you optimize your application. But that's a deeper topic than I can > afford to respond to here. > > The rest of this message presumes that you're familiar with WO's > built-in statistics collecting and display. If not, send another > message on that topic. That facility is both too valuable and too > convenient to leave out of your optimizing bag of tricks. > > The first question to ask, and still keep things simple, is what are > you optimizing for, response time or throughput? If throughput is > your issue, I would look first to moving the database to another > host. If you've done that, then start increasing your number of > instances, but don't expect a great deal of throughput improvement > from this technique past the point of a couple instances per CPU on > your host. You can gain some throughput advantage with one instance > taking advantage of the wait times of another instance, but the > marginal throughput advantage of adding instances goes down quickly > beyond two per CPU. And, of course, watch for thrashing, which can > destroy the effect of any other improvements quite quickly. > > However, if response time rather than throughput is the issue, more > instances can help a lot if you have long running queries. There are > other approaches to this problem, but increasing the number of > instances is probably the simplest effective response. In this case, > start with one instance for each CPU in your server. Collect > statistics for a day or so, then increase to two instances per CPU. > Again collect and analyze your statistics and repeat until you see > little effective improvement in average response times. Basically, > what you're trying to do here is to keep the next user's request from > blocking behind an earlier long running request. For every user's > request that blocks behind that long running request, you've > increased the number of users who perceive your web site to be slow, > whether it is or not. > > These statistics are best collected on an app running in production, > since that will give you the most valid request profile. If you're > already running in production with many instances and are afraid of > going all the way back to one instance per CPU for analysis, then > approach the problem from the other direction. However many instances > you are currently running, take the statistics for a day, then > decrease the number of instances by one to determine the marginal > improvement that you've just lost for that one. Continue removing > instances until you see a significant difference, then add that > instance back in. > > Other than just guessing, there are few other ways to approach the > number of instance problem because it tends to be very dependent on > the specific application. > > Regards, > Jerry > > On Jan 27, 2006, at 5:05 PM, Eric Stewart wrote: > > > How do you know when you are running to many instances of a WO App on > > a given server? > > > > I understand that you obviously can't run more instances than you have > > memory to work with. So if you have 4 GB of memory and your running WO > > Apps consuming 256 MB per app, obviously you can't run more than > > roughly 16 apps. > > > > I realize that the number of processors is also going to play a role > > in this. Just because you have enough memory to run 16 apps doesn't > > mean that's your ceiling. If you have only two processors, then you > > can at most simulateously handle 2 operations. In this case do you > > just monitor your CPU usage and once you start approaching 50-75% CPU > > utilization on a constant basis then you know you are running the max > > number of instances you should be running. > > > > What do you guys who deploy large applications with millions of > > requests per day look for when determining exactly how many instances > > to run on a given server. > > > > Thank you for your time, > > > > Eric Stewart > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > _______________________________________________ > > Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored. > > Webobjects-dev mailing list ([email protected]) > > Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: > > http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/webobjects-dev/jerrywwalker% > > 40gmail.com > > > > This email sent to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > -- > __ Jerry W. Walker, > WebObjects Developer/Instructor for High Performance Industrial > Strength Internet Enabled Systems > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > 203 278-4085 office > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 9 > Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2006 18:37:43 +0100 > From: Ute Hoffmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: [OT?]Help needed with data access MS SQL Server > 2005/EOModeler > To: [email protected] > Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed > > Hi, > I need some help with a connection to MSSQL Express 2005. I got a > running install Windows 2000 and in the same network a Mac Os X Tiger > with WO. All seems well, I can somehow access my Database through > monitor.... BUT > > I would like to get the tables I created (in this simple test install a > table called adress)... but what I see in place when I connect to my > database through EOModeler (in the wizard, where one choses the tables > one wants to connect to) is a huge number of sys.something and > INFORMATION_SCHEMA.something entries, but nothing of the table I really > want to access. All those entries look to me like system tables. > > Is there anyone around who has experience with MSSQL Server and WO who > perhaps can give me a hint what to do to get to the table I want to > connect to. > > Yes, the database exists, the table is in there, the user can access it > in sqlcmd and select * from tablename gives back the correct data. So > where is this table when connecting by EOModeler? > > Is this a rights problem? I gave that user the rights on the database. > Do I need to give it access to the table as well? > > It definitely has read access in the sqlcmd...I can see those values! > > Any clues? > > Thanks for any suggestion. > > Regards, > > Ute > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 10 > Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2006 20:02:32 +0100 > From: "Ruenagel, Frank" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: RE: [OT?]Help needed with data access MS SQL Server > 2005/EOModeler > To: "Ute Hoffmann" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Cc: [email protected] > Message-ID: > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" > > Hi, > > this sounds very strange. EOModeler > seems to find the "Master"-database, not the database > your table "adress" is in. I tested EOModeler's "create model wizard" > with a SQL-Server's "master" database: I also got > the Information-Schema-views in Eomodeler's table-list. > Your URL should look like: > > jdbc:microsoft:sqlserver://xx.xx.xx.xx:1433;DatabaseName=MYDATABASE > > If you skip "DatabaseName", the driver picks the default Database: > Master. > > Good luck! > > Frank > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > pple.com]O > > n Behalf Of Ute Hoffmann > > Sent: Sunday, January 29, 2006 6:38 PM > > To: [email protected] > > Subject: [OT?]Help needed with data access MS SQL Server > > 2005/EOModeler > > > > > > Hi, > > I need some help with a connection to MSSQL Express 2005. I got a > > running install Windows 2000 and in the same network a Mac Os X Tiger > > with WO. All seems well, I can somehow access my Database through > > monitor.... BUT > > > > I would like to get the tables I created (in this simple test > > install a > > table called adress)... but what I see in place when I connect to my > > database through EOModeler (in the wizard, where one choses > > the tables > > one wants to connect to) is a huge number of sys.something and > > INFORMATION_SCHEMA.something entries, but nothing of the > > table I really > > want to access. All those entries look to me like system tables. > > > > Is there anyone around who has experience with MSSQL Server > > and WO who > > perhaps can give me a hint what to do to get to the table I want to > > connect to. > > > > Yes, the database exists, the table is in there, the user can > > access it > > in sqlcmd and select * from tablename gives back the correct data. So > > where is this table when connecting by EOModeler? > > > > Is this a rights problem? I gave that user the rights on the > > database. > > Do I need to give it access to the table as well? > > > > It definitely has read access in the sqlcmd...I can see those values! > > > > Any clues? > > > > Thanks for any suggestion. > > > > Regards, > > > > Ute > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored. > > Webobjects-dev mailing list ([email protected]) > > Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: > > http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/webobjects-dev/webobjec > ts%40symposion.de > > This email sent to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > ------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > Webobjects-dev mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.apple.com/mailman/listinfo/webobjects-dev > > End of Webobjects-dev Digest, Vol 3, Issue 56 > *********************************************
-- _______________________________________________ Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored. Webobjects-dev mailing list ([email protected]) Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/webobjects-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com This email sent to [email protected]
