On Wed, 15 May 2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > I have a similar opinion. I haven't looked at it, and I won't do that in the > near future. So you might have done something really good, but I doubt that > after reading Matt's mail ...
I think that's the opposite of what Matt was saying. At least, I interpreted Matt's mail as saying basically this, "it has lots of flaws and here's what I think they are _BUT_ it's still a good start so let's go with it." And nowhere did I see Matt say that Stephen hadn't done good work. You're being _way_ too harsh on someone who's obviously spent some serious time thinking about the problems P5EE would need to solve. Just cause his pre-0.01 version doesn't address a lot of those is hardly a reason to bash him. I'll follow up with a critique of the P5EE stuff like Matt's, but I basically agree that this should become the basis of the "real" P5EE stuff. -dave /*================== www.urth.org we await the New Sun ==================*/
