On Dec 21, 2:46 pm, David Vallner <d... / vallner.net> wrote:
> John Wilger wrote:
> > Most likely, I would
> > go with something like Flex[1] for the client, since it's relatively
> > painless to distribute upgrades that way.Mind you, this is what I said in my first reply to Richard in the first
> place and then went along with the idea. I didn't say the architecture
> is an ideal one or one I would pick, just not without redeeming value of
> -some sort-.

OK, I must have just missed that post. This thread has about two or
three topics in it, and I was only half following it when I decided to
speak up on that architecture. I went back and skimmed through it to
make sure I wasn't saying something that was already said, but I didn't
re-read every single post closely. Apologies if I offended.