Question to Fabric-in-modo users: Tutorials or projects?

malbrechtmalbrecht Fabric for Houdini Posts: 752 ✭✭✭

Hi, crowd,

putting together those tutorials I created eats up an enormous amount of time (no matter how I turn things, it takes me roughly about 1 hour per final minute of video).
I love doing it, because I am learning a lot along the way and I feel like I am getting closer to how I, personally, like tutorials to be. Which, obviously, is not what most people prefer - but without feedback on what you want to see (or hear?), I am lost to my own devices ...

So I would love to hear from you: Do you want me to record more tutorials, concentrate on specific areas? Do you want me to change something - in general or some detail (which may well be "use another narrator, different content, change editing, pace, length and resolution")?

I have a few ideas for further "introductory" videos, but the lack of feedback makes me think this is not what people want to see. I am using Fabric for some development experiments (avoiding the need to constantly compile/debug) as well - if there's considerate interest in following such experiments, I could record some of that (like using the "mesh painting" tool and improving it further, maybe integrating physics or whatever).

To me, Fabric already has proven to be a very valuable tool, given its stability and reliability when "pushing limits", allowing me to try things out, experiment without the environment crashing down on me. One of my current projects is creating a "destructive paint tool" for the Trollbridge movie - my vector math definitely isn't up to par for that yet, but Fabric provides the kind of "comfort zone" to learn what I need to learn.
This is what I would like to transport with my videos: Fabric is not a dumb "plug-in and get results-out" (though it can be used as such), but can adopt to the user's needs, it is flexible, yet consistent. I do think that modo can benefit greatly from integrating Fabric (not just to build KITs for procedural geometry creation, but for actual pipeline tools), yet, I just as well think that "the community" needs to see what can be done with this integration (in terms of different approaches/use cases) as well as how easy and straight forward it is.

Or not is: Could we, please, maybe discuss areas where people are seeing road blocks? Having issues with understanding how to solve a certain problem? Could we, maybe, share ideas for what Fabric could be used for?

Here's one: I am laboring with a modelling job right now, where I have to create a room based on CAD drawings. I do have a postscript file of the drawing, so I can extract lines/curves and convert those to 3d-ish geometry. For a single job creating a complex tool does not make much sense, but if this is a "typical job", why not create a "turn a CAD drawing into a 3d-scene" tool? By tagging lines with their required extrusion size, it should be quite easy to build such a tool in Fabric - maybe not providing 100% of the work, but if it can shave off 75% of the tedious "draw line to given length, extrude to given size, connect vertices" - this could be a perfect "use case".

What would you like me to tackle in tutorials - or would you prefer me to, finally, shut up? What are you using Fabric for (in modo or outside)? What are your reasons for getting on the beta-test-ship, as you must have had some ideas about what to use Fabric for? Are those expectations met or do you feel like Fabric is a dead-end (for modo)?

Marc


Marc Albrecht - marc-albrecht.de - does things.

Comments

  • ThomasDruckerThomasDrucker Posts: 16

    Hi Marc,
    Your videos have been very helpful for me in my first steps into Fabric for modo. My guess is that the lack of response is mainly due to the very steep learning curve of the whole process. Most modo users are, I think, artists instead of programmers. For me just the installation process took a long time as I didn't even know what "source environment.sh" could mean.

    Therefore I think the first step to get more people involved is a series of tutorials, or step-by-step instructions, of the very basics of Fabric in modo. And some simple examples of what can be accomplished. The "doughnut with the push deformer" or the DNA-helix from the samples folder are perfect examples of useful and seemingly simple things that just cannot be done in modo by itself.

    Another thing that's missing at the moment is an overview of differences between Canvas Standalone and the modo version. Last night I spent a few hours looking for the output of the "report" command (found it finally in modo's event log). But I still don't know where to find the preset explorer. That makes it hard to follow the basic tutorials that cover canvas standalone.

    That said, at the moment I welcome any video you make. They're very entertaining and informative. What more can you ask for!

    Thomas

  • malbrechtmalbrecht Fabric for Houdini Posts: 752 ✭✭✭
    edited April 2016

    Hi, Thomas!

    thanks a megaton!

    What more can you ask for!

    Exactly this what you just did: Giving some feedback with thoughts and ideas what other people consider important. What I think of "straight forward and self explanatory", others may see as "Chinese with a strong Danish accent spoken by a Russian 3-year old". And vice versa: I have no idea what "art" is or how to define it, not to speak of recognizing it as such when getting hit over the forehead by it. :-)

    But I still don't know where to find the preset explorer.

    Note: This forum does not allow me to link to a specific POSITION in the video, so please add "&t=607" to the URL (or "?t=607", depending on the URL path)

    Drag the left side of the canvas (in a standard layout, that is).

    I spent a few hours looking for the output of the "report" command

    Note: This forum does not allow me to link to a specific POSITION in the video, so please add "&t=202" to the URL (or "?t=202", depending on the URL path)

    If some output of the node that is reporting something is connected to the right side of the canvas, therefor the node gets evaluated, you can see the output of the "report" in the Canvas debugging console: Drag up the lower part of the canvas.

    Therefore I think the first step to get more people involved is a series of tutorials, or step-by-step instructions, of the very basics of Fabric in modo. And some simple examples of what can be accomplished. The "doughnut with the push deformer" or the DNA-helix from the samples folder are perfect examples of useful and seemingly simple things that just cannot be done in modo by itself.

    Thanks - someone else mentioned this idea of going into some of the example scenes and rebuilding them from scratch (or explaining them) before, so I might just do that ... if the Fabric Guys don't have any plans on that themselves.

    Another thing that's missing at the moment is an overview of differences between Canvas Standalone and the modo version.

    I agree - I would even go a step further and ask for a "heads up" for first-timers, as an example I'd take the "simple" fact that modo does not yet have inline drawing capabilities, so you need to expose a geometry, while on the standalone Canvas application the exact opposite is true, it being ONLY an inline drawing system. These "foundation" things need to be explained for "greenhorns", I wasn't interested in that so far, but I really wish there was more of a "movement" towards using Fabric in modo, I am willing to invest a bit of time into that.

    So, again, THANK YOU for the feedback, it is more than appreciated!

    Marc


    Marc Albrecht - marc-albrecht.de - does things.

  • ThomasDruckerThomasDrucker Posts: 16

    Hi marc,
    Welcome! And thanks for pointing out those drag-out windows. At one moment I was just randomly clicking on the screen hoping that somehow a window would magically appear. At this stage in the Beta it could be just those simple things that make you want to give up and wait for the official release.

    Thomas

  • PoobyPooby Posts: 122
    edited April 2016

    Hi Marc,
    I have found that in general, the Modo community are confused as to what Fabric is, and it seems very high end and out of their reach.

    It reminds me of the first few years when ICE was introduced in Softimage. I held this view too for 3 years. After an initial attempt at learning ICE, I gave up and labelled it a techy tool for programmer types.

    What made me crack ICE, was watching a tutorial series by Thigo Costa.. the AHA! moment didn't come from learning ICE directly, it was more fundimental than that. It was gaining an understanding of what vectors do and how to manipulate them to do a few cool tricks. I can remember being confounded by the whole thing previous to that.

    I'd never even considered that x,y,z position was a vector. I didn't really think about it to be honest ,but if someone has asked, I just have explained it as 3 numbers that describe where something is in 3 axis. A vector to me was something that was to do with maths and who's name comes up in things like "Vector maps" but not sure what that meant.

    Once I saw x,y,z as being described as a direction with length that could be rotated, added to other vectors, etc I was like 'OH I SEE HOW IT WORKS NOW!' loads of previously opaque things started making sense.

    Once I has this understanding of vectors, using ICE had a clearer purpose. I saw it as a bunch of tools to set vectors and i realised that you didn't need to actually know that much before you could do really cool things. The walls fell down really fast.

    I think, with teaching Fabric to Modo users, firstly they need to know at least what vectors are and the kind of awesome things they can do with very minimal knowledge.

    What stalled my tutorials is that I feel that its too early to promote Canvas for making deformers. ( my area of expertise)
    There is the most obvious reason, being that Input Meshes are not supported,
    ...but also I feel there needs to be a few things happen before I can be honest about how straightforward Canvas is to use, such as being able to deal with 2d arrays etc. I think the internal graphs will profoundly improve matters, and I think its better to hold off till then as I think if I tried to sell the current system to newbies I would frighten people off.

    I find it Canvas too hard to use currently, If I'm honest ( and I don't think its too boastful to say I'm pretty nippy with vector manipulation ) For example, I can't make a relax deformer without KL because of the 1d array limitation.

    Thus the solution always coming back at me is "Learn KL", Which is missing the point as me doing that is not going to help the development of Canvas and thus doesn't stand a hope of attracting artist TD's. I am very very keen to evangalise Canvas. But the bottom line is that I can't demonstrate something is easy, if its actually not.

    Anyway, in general. I think what a good tutorial hook should do is

    a: Show something awesomely useful or very cool
    b: make people realise its within their grasp by full and clear explanation of the thinking behind it, making it idiot proof. Only have about 4 new things to learn to make it.
    c: leave people with ideas how to improvise around the things learnt

    I'm primarily trying to help the visual programming development, in my own small way, through providing feedback on Canvas.

  • malbrechtmalbrecht Fabric for Houdini Posts: 752 ✭✭✭

    Thanks, Paul @Pooby !

    I have been doing tutorials for modo for quite some time. I find it very, very hard to find a compromise of what I personally prefer in a tutorial (which is some "background information" to help me understand what is going on) and the (what modo people seem to call "artist's approach") purely visual, single project-oriented "draw by numbers" approach. This thread here is an attempt to reflect my problems in "getting there".
    In fact, I think I am completely unable to get to a kind of mush-up (probably because I lack the fundamental understanding of how "art" is defined in this specific genre), that suits both the very specific modo user view of things and my own expectations of a usable tutorial. The total lack of feedback from the modo community has made others stop their efforts to provide high quality tutorials before, this "drying-out" process is still going on (with tutors leaving frustrated thanks to zero-feedback).
    So your three-points-master plan seems like the best approach (show awesomeness, explain awesomeness, encourage awesome experiments) - it seems that I failed in providing that with my modo-Fabric tutorials, judging from the feedback of the modo community (or lack thereof).

    The question about whether using Canvas (in the sense of the node-graph-view) is "better" or "more artists friendly" than one or two lines of codes is something that might turn into a religious debate over time, I am afraid. I created some complex node-graph systems while doing the tutorials that were unbelievably complex, impossible to read "at one glance" and could have been replaced by 2-3 lines of of code on average, which would have been understandable with a single line of comment added. To me the "nodal approach" only makes sense when presets provide 99% of the work and you really only connect output to input, not having to deal with modifications on the way.
    A simple example for this would be: In order to provide some function (a node) with a max value derived from some array size, you always have to deal with "I start at 0" while something else "starts as 1". So you have to throw a handful of math.add or math.sub nodes into the graph, just to adjust the max-value. Alternatively you can set up some variables, which add to the confusion by presenting seemly unconnected nodes somewhere in space. Or you connect the output from a single const node to several inputs, creating long spaghetti lines throughout the canvas. None of those "solutions" make the "code" (the graphic representation of the tool) "readable".

    Because of this I struggle with your - otherwise, as a personal point of view, fully justified - critique that Fabric/Canvas "right now" is "too complex" to be used by the "average user" (forgive me if I interpreted you wrongly here). I do think that Fabric/Canvas has its strength exactly in its ability to quickly hack in a solution of your own (by means of code) instead of having to build overly complex node-graphs. It is exactly this flexibility that, to me, is the "perfect addition" to modo's extremely cemented, very limited schematics approach, where you are absolutely bound to channels the developers provide you with (not having any way of adding your own "peeks" anywhere).
    Meaning: I think that, if the Fabric guys want modo users to appreciate what Fabric provides them with, there is some need of "evangelizing" the benefits of Fabric's flexibility. That is not to say that more presets aren't helpful - but, as you can tell from the mini collection of tools I already published for free use (like the "splinify"-preset), creating your own presets is very, very easy to do IF you accept some (limited) code-writing along the way. It's a do-it-once pain. Once you wrote the lines, you save them as a preset and can "noodle up things" forever after.

    So ... is that an idea for a tutorial? How do I create my own presets in order to make life easier in "Canvas", by going through "the hell of writing code"? I'm up for a challenge :)

    Marc


    Marc Albrecht - marc-albrecht.de - does things.

  • PoobyPooby Posts: 122
    edited April 2016

    There is absolutely no doubt that Canvas's flexibility is in the fact you can drop in some KL where you like. Its awesome. I totally agree.

    However, I have a very strong suspicion that to a newcomer all they will take away is. "Oh you have to write code to get anything done. Thanks but no thanks, not for me. I'm going to get back to being productive."

    Whereas, if you said. "Look. here's 5 nodes" and 5 mins later, you had a normal-push deformer. Then people are left going
    "Oh! that was almost TOO easy. I thought a deformer would be pages of code" THEN. once you've showed that, you could say "Now I'll make it a preset and thus I never need to make a push deformer again"

    They are then left with the knowledge of how to make a specific thing, with accompanying 'THATS REALLY EASY!' positive vibes.

    Psychology comes into it a lot. People want to feel that you are in the same league as them, not some high falooting expert, otherwise they will put you in a different category to them and lose the confidence that they can achieve what you can' My most popular ICE videos are the REALLY basic ones. The cleverer they get, the more they lose people.

    I'm primarily trying to help the visual programming development, in my own small way, through providing feedback on Canvas.

  • malbrechtmalbrecht Fabric for Houdini Posts: 752 ✭✭✭
    edited April 2016

    Whereas, if you said. "Look. here's 5 nodes" and 5 mins later, you had a normal-push deformer. Then people are left going
    "Oh! that was almost TOO easy. I thought a deformer would be pages of code" THEN. once you've showed that, you could say "Now I'll make it a preset and thus I never need to make a push deformer again"

    I hear you. That's exactly why it took my several days of work to figure out how to do my tutorials "in canvas only" (while it would have been minutes to do it in KL only). I tried to show how simple it can be to create "procedural geometry", only using a single function (extrude).

    In that sense: Do you think that the tutorials I created are (still?) too "different league"-ish? I thought the opposite might be the case with them being far too simple to be of interest (be it the outcome or the nonstop explanation-babble).

    Because I really want to improve - and right now, although I understand your perspective, I just don't see how I can apply your ideas to my "output".

    (As a sidenote to explain why I am interested in doing tutorials in the first place: Most money I make with modo comes from my tutorials, because people see me as a "problem solver" - I am currently doing my first "creative" job with modo, so far I have always earned my money by surfing around the many cliffs in the software and helping others being productive. So those tutorials are meant to be a two edged sword: Helping people understand modo/Fabric and demonstrating my way of thinking/working as an advertise for my services.)


    Marc Albrecht - marc-albrecht.de - does things.

  • PoobyPooby Posts: 122

    I think your tutorials are great. I wasn't aiming to critique them. Just to join in with some thoughts.

    I think (for newcomers) maybe you might benefit from making smaller bite sized tutorials though. In my experience People don't tend to be hands on following as they watch, they'll watch then assess whether they thought it felt easy or not.
    If there are 20 easy steps, it still overall will feel hard, or at least a lot of work but if theres less it may be more likely to sink in.

    I'm primarily trying to help the visual programming development, in my own small way, through providing feedback on Canvas.

  • malbrechtmalbrecht Fabric for Houdini Posts: 752 ✭✭✭

    I wasn't aiming to critique them. Just to join in with some thoughts.

    But, please, do! :) That's what this thread is about ...

    To concretize: Do you think it would motivate modo users to give Fabric a try if a tutorial - as an example - showed how to create your own preset and then use that ("purely graphically")? That would be a "tiny" tutorial, but, if I understand you correctly, it might be a giant leap for that specific type of user, right?


    Marc Albrecht - marc-albrecht.de - does things.

  • PoobyPooby Posts: 122

    I think doing a tutorial which is split into chunks with a 'so what have we learnt?' recap rather than 1 whole thing, can be more friendly and less intimidating. But it needs to show or lead to making something really useful.

    I think the bigger problem though is going to be convincing people in Modo land that they need Fabric at all.
    Modo tends to appeal to people who see themselves as primarily artists, and many artists like to draw an imaginary boundary beyond which only Technicians operate. I think many might be more interested in what OTHER users may make in fabric that they can use, rather than getting their own hands dirty.

    I think they need to see stuff that they couldn't do before, then proof that its achievable. Its about dispelling the notion of that boundary being anything but a self imposed limitation.

    I'm primarily trying to help the visual programming development, in my own small way, through providing feedback on Canvas.

  • malbrechtmalbrecht Fabric for Houdini Posts: 752 ✭✭✭

    I think they need to see stuff that they couldn't do before

    ... you may have a point there.
    In my experience, so far, the maximum you can get from "the typical modo user" (if that exists?) is a raising eyebrow and a British "fascinating".

    For example: I asked (in two modo communities) about what exactly the (back then very loud) cry for "a better text tool" actually meant, what features/functions/outcomes those who cried for it actually needed or wanted. There was no real response at all. Someone (giving the best reply I found) said "well, something like what you can do in C4d", which I did not find that helpful (although I looked at some C4d-demos and thought "well, you can do that in modo already, what's the point?"). Well, now I do have a really powerful text tool (currently using Fabric + modo, but in theory I could port it to modo) and there is ZERO interest in it, although I demonstrated what it can do (features that those users mentioned where crying for).

    Another example: I have been told that "it is impossible to do good cloth simulation in modo" over and over again. I have proven otherwise (I am doing the cloth simulation on the Trollbridge project all in modo - 801 and a bit 901, since 901 has quirks, we have to rely on 801 more). It is absolutely possible to do prime-time cloth simulation in modo. Whether it makes sense (given the slow performance) is a totally different topic - but even my offer to create a FREE complete modo dynamics course that included how to do "prime time cloth sim" did not accumulate to more hands in the air than I could fit in my living room (and do a face-to-face workshop, which is basically what I did then).

    So I think: Seeing stuff "that you could not do before" can be delivered, although modo is capable of quite a bit more than the average user (usually) realizes. It should be "stuff that you can actually make use of", not just "that you couldn't do before", though. And that brings you back to square one: Thinking outside the box, trying to solve problems instead of simply clicking a button is EXACTLY what Fabric brings to the game and seems(!) to be exactly what is the "not-for-modo-users"-way.
    It is this "paradigm"(?) that I want to break out of. I consider it a good thing(tm) if you can create your own make-it-awesome-button. But, how ever you look at it, that will always require a bit of work ONCE.

    I am even willing to chuck out little helper presets/extensions every now and then (like I have done on this forum) if that gets people involved, if that creates some motion, some "OK, that's actually cool - how could I do that?".

    If there was some noise in this (modo-subsection) forum, we could come up with "challenges": How would you solve this or that problem that we just had in our production? Discuss approaches, provide quick-and-dirty proof of concept solutions and show how powerful Fabric in modo can be. But there isn't even a "bah, that's boring, I am outa here"-movement.

    Like: I just finnished a visualization job. It was tedious, because I had to create geometry based on some PDF drawings. Now, technically it would be doable to write a PDF-reader (or more likely an EPS-reader) that allowed you to use such a drawing as a starting point, click on lines you want to extrude, enter measurements and get your geometry created on the spot. I could do that. I won't for a single job that may not create a follow-up, but if that was something that others are struggling with, why not make it a colaboration project, where people can learn along the way?

    I am willing to invest a lot of time (R) into such projects, because sometimes they pay back, and be it in contacts. But I am stuck, I find myself sitting in a forest without trees on a meadow without gras drinking water without anything wet in it: THERE IS NO FEEDBACK from the community.
    If it was just me, I'd simply pack my stuff and do Blender tutorials. But it is not just me.

    Marc


    Marc Albrecht - marc-albrecht.de - does things.

  • Aaron KentAaron Kent Posts: 66 ✭✭
    edited April 2016

    Marc, I think you are doing an amazing job and I find any and all tutorials done by anyone on here invaluable. I think the larger issue is that until Modo allows access to native mesh attributes it isn't going to benefit most users enough to justify what is a pretty steep learning curve. Hence, a general silence from the community. Your talent lies in understanding and creating great tools in this app, but for the majority of us, even baby steps are excruciating and tend to end in frustration and throwing in of towels. The Modo community as I have experienced it is a wonderful group of creative and helpful people, but I think we are still a community largely utilizing Modo for tasks that are not heavily / if at all Fabric dependent. Personally, I have been staying in the standalone in preparation and scratching my way along trying to become used to the workflow so that when upgrades and features do occur I will have a head start over in Modo to build what I have in my head. Personally, I'd rather see many simple tutorials dealing very directly with one or two nodes (kind of like the simple stuff I have been attempting) over super tutorials. You are basically Mr. Miyagi. Teach us to sand the floor and wax on and wax off. Then, take us to Modo with those little skills we've learned and blow our minds!

    Cheers

    AK

  • Aaron KentAaron Kent Posts: 66 ✭✭

    Also, I have an idea for what I think would be a great "multi-step" tutorial. I'd be happy to outline it with you and try to break it down into a large number of mini tutorials. Initially, I wanted to undertake it myself, but between available time and my job I haven't made as much headway in Fabric as I would like. It might be a cool project for us to start in the Standalone and port into Modo as functionality becomes available.

    Cheers

    AK

  • malbrechtmalbrecht Fabric for Houdini Posts: 752 ✭✭✭

    Thank you so much, @Aaron Kent - I'd welcome any help with getting more people "on the boat", so, please, start a thread with that step-by-step tutorial project you have in mind. Or, if you prefer to do it in a more cooperated direct approach, feel free to mail me, PM me or skype me at marc_j_albrecht!

    Marc


    Marc Albrecht - marc-albrecht.de - does things.

  • Aaron KentAaron Kent Posts: 66 ✭✭
    edited April 2016

    @malbrecht - i will create a very granular outline to encompass the scope of the tutorial I am envisioning and email it to you. Where I can i will note nodes in fabric (or at least how I learned them in ICE) - from there we could go through it and see what's feasible now and what would be possible to implement in Modo down the line.

    Cheers

    AK

  • PoobyPooby Posts: 122
    edited April 2016

    It IS frustrating knowing that you have this really powerful thing that you show off and get a 'whatever' response from the public.
    I naively thought that when I showed ICE off, it might make people wake up and 'see the light' (which it did to a limited audience) but I often find myself frustrated at the general lack of interest in things that require 'techy' knowledge.
    At the same time, I have to remind myself that I was in that camp for 3 years after ICE's release. So I understand it when I look back on that Dark age of mine.
    I do think that getting people interested is as much about dealing with the psychology of it as anything else. Making people inspired and empowered, rather than isolated / excluded.

    From my standpoint, Like i said earlier in the thread, I'm awaiting Fabric's deformation to improve and Modo Fabric to accept meshes, then I would like to show how you can make some cool deformers, muscle/skin systems etc.
    Until then, (mainly because I'm really busy,) I'm not able to give Fabric much tinker time. However, I always get excited when I see either of you two come up with new tutorials. I find them very helpful indeed, so I eagerly await whatever you come up with.

    I'm primarily trying to help the visual programming development, in my own small way, through providing feedback on Canvas.

  • anhungxadieuanhungxadieu Posts: 108

    @malbrecht ,
    i hope to see more tutorial about:

    • how to work with strand (for example ice strand in softimage this is array of point), create an mesh from strand loft through the strand for example. I think the concept of this one is -->how to deal with array inside fabric
    • how a mesh can create in fabric (how to create array of point and array of indexies)
    • i see the idea to converse a CAD file into a 3d it really good, i always want to procedural create a building, door, window, rail ...
    • how can output a mesh form Fabric into a DDC for render, for example i create a grass, scatter trees, bush (how can output array of point it content a matrix that i can instance with my own mesh in side my DDC to render)... it very useful in archviz actually

    Thank for your time!

    Thụy Nguyễn
    CG Artist

  • malbrechtmalbrecht Fabric for Houdini Posts: 752 ✭✭✭

    Hi,

    with Fabric being now officially available to modo, I do hope to get some more feedback from modo-users. That said, thank you all, "core-bunch", for your support!

    I agree that some fundamental tutorials on how to work with arrays seem necessary. That, however, is more on the "purely Fabric" side, it isn't that much of interest for the integration (in modo in particular), since moving array data from/to modo isn't possible yet. And I doubt it will become possible any time soon, as modo does not provide arrays in schematics itself.

    As for mesh-creation: I am not sure I fully understand the question. If you output a mesh to modo, a "procedural mesh item" is created. You can convert that (the CanvasPI) to a regular item and have a "frozen geometry" mesh. Or, since UV maps are now being exposed to modo, you can work with the procedural mesh.

    @Aaron Kent I assume you are over-busy, so I have no intentions of urging you to anything, just letting you know that I haven't received an email from you yet :)

    I am currently discussing some tutorial-series with a small number of people. It seems that there is barely any interest at all in modo-tutorials, so it is very likely that I will concentrate on "solving tasks" in Fabric in the future.

    Please keep input coming!

    Marc


    Marc Albrecht - marc-albrecht.de - does things.

  • Aaron KentAaron Kent Posts: 66 ✭✭

    @malbrecht - apologies - yes I have been a bit swamped - expect the email very soon - I will try to finish it up tomorrow or Sunday and forward to you.

    Cheers

    AK

Sign In or Register to comment.