"Phillip J. Eby" wrote:
> At 03:53 PM 3/2/01 -0500, R. David Murray wrote:
> >I could be wrong, but I didn't read what Phillip wrote as saying he was
> >suggesting TransWarp as a player in the Module Persistence implementation,
> >but rather that he wanted people to see the value of TransWarp first hand
> >so that they would want to make sure that Module Persistence and TransWarp
> >could play together....
> >
> Yes, that's exactly what I meant.  :)

Ah, ok.  Now, Evan's suggestion of putting the marshalled module in the
ZODB is quite a bit simpler; maybe that's what everyone has in mind.  We
haven't discussed this stuff here at DC lately.


Zope-Dev maillist  -  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - 
 http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )

Reply via email to