Adam Jack wrote: > Note: I use telnet and not the GUI & feel that is a valid use case & plan to > continue that way. I hope this helps you w/ command line debugging.
It is a valid use case. Not one currently supported, but a valid use case.
Silly me, I guess I made some wacky assumption that Python Gump might resemble current Gump. ;-)
The command line usage, with HTML (or similar) output, for running from cron, is the only use case I care about. Surely, it is the only mandatory use case to support, no? Gump automates builds, that is it's value. A GUI on that is fine, but not to replace the automation, no?
I understand busy, but I can't tell if this posting is flippant, or flipping off. Am I too far off base with this?
The Python version is an experiment. The primary purpose of the experiment was to test assertions that a codebase which was based on a real scripting language and without a dependency on XSLT would attract a greater community. So far, it hasn't demonstrated that assertion.
My focus to date with this code base has been to explore things that would have been difficult if not impossible with the current Java/XSLT/bat/sh approach. The parts I have not focused on were the ones that I knew were doable.
- Sam Ruby
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
