jarl van katwijk wrote: > > hehe, just a little bit :) But mostly I'm defending my idears.. > Also when the Overflow project aint going to collaborate, I'll still watch them > very regulairly and I surtainly will think a lot more about how to do wrapping of > sub nets of overflow-type nodes inside a gms\loci node. Because it add new > features without breaking the security \ locationing \ etc. I don't believe Jean-Marc wants to bulldoze your code and ideas. I think he just saw Overflow has possibly being able to handle the role of application integrator. Again, we should consider GMS and Overflow as separate applications, but applications that share a lot of technology. You even admitted that there are some Overflow features that you like and would want to have for GMS. Is there anything wrong with the idea that Overflow and GMS can run together yet be perfectly usable without each other? Cheers. Jeff -- +----------------------------------+ | J.W. Bizzaro | | | | http://bioinformatics.org/~jeff/ | | | | BIOINFORMATICS.ORG | | The Open Lab | | | | http://bioinformatics.org/ | +----------------------------------+