I agree (my question was mainly rhetorical, so I didn't propose the
change ;-) ). But then, that leaves these questions/issues:
- We have to get permission from the author to change (or even
remove) a Mogul page. This is probably not a principle problem in
case of ozh, as we already got the permission to take over the
development. After we released a new ozh version, I may again
approach its orig author Nils Franzen.
- How are pages in Mogul changed (or even removed) from a
technical point of view -- if the original owner may not do it.
Best,
Torsten
On Aug 14, 2007, at 9:47 PM, Pavel wrote:
On Mon, 13 Aug 2007 Torsten Anders <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
We should then soon release the new Collozeum ozh and also publish it
via MOGUL. BTW: how should Collozeum versions of MOGUL software
like ozh
appear in MOGUL? Should we perhaps just add a second ozh
contribution to
MOGUL (with a new root ID), and leave the old one untouched?
The old one should at least point to the new one, and very loudly. It
would probably be even better to remove the old one to avoid
confusion.
Generally, having outdated code more accessible than working code
is not a
good thing.
/pavel
______________________________________________________________________
___________
mozart-users mailing list mozart-
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.mozart-oz.org/mailman/listinfo/mozart-users
_________________________________________________________________________________
mozart-users mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.mozart-oz.org/mailman/listinfo/mozart-users
