On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 1:33 PM, Justin Ross wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 1:27 PM, Rafael Schloming
> wrote:
>
> > On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 11:15 AM, Gordon Sim wrote:
> >
> > > On 02/13/2015 03:00 PM, Rafael Schloming wrote:
> > >
> > >> This has come up tangentially in a couple of threads
On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 1:27 PM, Rafael Schloming wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 11:15 AM, Gordon Sim wrote:
>
> > On 02/13/2015 03:00 PM, Rafael Schloming wrote:
> >
> >> This has come up tangentially in a couple of threads now, and there
> seems
> >> to be at least tacit agreement that the p
On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 11:15 AM, Gordon Sim wrote:
> On 02/13/2015 03:00 PM, Rafael Schloming wrote:
>
>> This has come up tangentially in a couple of threads now, and there seems
>> to be at least tacit agreement that the plural doesn't make sense anymore
>> now that we've seen how integrations
On 02/13/2015 03:00 PM, Rafael Schloming wrote:
This has come up tangentially in a couple of threads now, and there seems
to be at least tacit agreement that the plural doesn't make sense anymore
now that we've seen how integrations/extensions will work.
I'll be posting an alpha later today, but
This has come up tangentially in a couple of threads now, and there seems
to be at least tacit agreement that the plural doesn't make sense anymore
now that we've seen how integrations/extensions will work.
I'll be posting an alpha later today, but before that I'd like to do the
reactors->reactor