Hi,
We should.
However, for the next version, I would propose to change Fame to not
depend on this annotation but create one by default. The idea is that
in 99% of the cases we just want the information we have already in
the Smalltalk hierarchy.
Cheers,
Doru
On 19 Apr 2010, at 20:04, Simon Denier wrote:
> Hi
>
> I notice that the following classes are not described in Fame. Now
> they are Group classes, so it's not so important as instances are
> dynamically created. However, MooseGroup and similar are described.
> So should we be consistent with the rule?
>
> DudeDuplicationGroup
> DudeMultiplicationGroup
> FAMIXFileGroup
> FAMIXFolderGroup
> FAMIXGlobalVariableGroup
> FAMIXNamespaceGroup
> --
> Simon
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Moose-dev mailing list
>
[hidden email]
>
https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev--
www.tudorgirba.com
"Don't give to get. Just give."
_______________________________________________
Moose-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
Locked
