On 30 April 2011 20:59, Martijn Faassen <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi there, > >> Good question. We have never tried so far. I note that we're >> significantly rewritten vdm to be much simpler (and closer to >> history_meta) -- these changes can be found in changeset branch: > >> <https://bitbucket.org/okfn/vdm/src/changeset/> > > Interesting, I didn't realize that you had done a rewrite. I still > have my changes, which I've been maintaining and using, here: > > https://bitbucket.org/faassen/vdm-pending
Very interesting martijn. We should definitely look at this and we want to implement pending support for a requirement in the CKAN project. BTW: I should say I did try to integrate your original patches (and would still like to), see my last email on this subject: <http://lists.okfn.org/pipermail/okfn-help/2010-October/000916.html> > We've been using this quite a bit. I wonder how easy it would be to > merge the two, especially since I flattened the namespace into 'vdm'. I would really welcome that I think, modulo compatability issues. I already did a first attempt at integrating your other patches last Autumn but stopped when I ran into some of the issues detailed in that thread. Rufus _______________________________________________ okfn-help mailing list [email protected] http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/okfn-help
