On Tue, 23 Mar 2004, Adam Jack wrote: > > Question for a gump newbi. > > > > As the fog clears - you would anticipate a fog factor approaching zero. > > Maybe it should, a boundary value is more comparable. > > > In the context of gump - is zero fog a good thing? Summary - I don't > > understand the fog factor index - can anyone explain it or point me to > > relevant documentation? > > For today, quite the reverse. The larger the better.
I think part of the problem is that people think of "fog" as that murky stuff that nobody likes, instead of "FOG" as Friend Of Gump. If it was clear that it's a "friendship index", I don't think there would be a need to invert the sense, because a higher friendship index sounds better than a low one. ;-) My 2 cents... -- Martin Cooper > > Gump does what Gump does, and some projects support that better than others. > FOG is an attempt to translate that into something > simple/comparable/tangible so folks can get a quick insight into something's > suitability as a Gump dependency for their project. [It doesn't today > directly translate to any other project 'quality' metric, but it might one > day.] > > regards, > > Adam > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
