On Mon, 28 Apr 2008 10:01:04 -0700 Earl Miles <merlin@logrus.com> wrote:
Ivan Sergio Borgonovo wrote:
The fact that Views and CCK (that actually are complex modules etc...) still need to be ported, the numbers I cited in the previous email etc... should be a sign that the policy should be adjusted.
No. No. NO. I am really, really tired of hearing this as a
Sorry! Anyway take note of the conditional. Maybe it could sound better if it was phrased as "could be a sign" and anyway consider Views on which I admit to know nothing[1], but that I didn't take into play first, were just part of my argument. [1] that doesn't mean I'm neglecting the value of your work. That just mean I had other priorities other than learning how to use Views. -- Ivan Sergio Borgonovo http://www.webthatworks.it