Hi! First of all, welcome to the project! :-)
On Sun, Mar 11, 2007 at 09:22:24PM -0400, Isaiah Beerbower wrote: > I guess Workflow does describe the apps function better. Does anybody > else have an opinion on this? I like the name Workflow.app. We had quite a long discussion on the application naming issue on the mailinglist a while ago. The result was to try to use names that indicate the functionality for new applications. I think "Workflow.app" is a pretty good name. I've got a question about the code-generation idea. As we all know, the big issue with code generation is usually that it doesn't support the so-called round-trip engineering. This means that generated code is hard to transform back, especially when it's been modified before. When I generate an Io script using Workflow.app, will it still be possible to modify it again? -Guenther _______________________________________________ Etoile-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/etoile-discuss
