Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Adam> Yes, I mostly agree.
> Does that mean you second the proposal? I suggest we implement > this part of the proposal first, and leave the issue of the source > of the documentation to another ptoposal, since that is turning out > to be controversial. > This proposal has only one second at the moment. I would like > to see if there are others, and to move the non-controversial part > of the proposal out of the way. Yes, I second. I agree that the "controversial" part is worthy of it's own report (and is low priority too). .....A. P. [EMAIL PROTECTED]<URL:http://www.onShore.com/>
