I tend to agree with most of what has been said in this thread so far. The reasons the Python rewrite started AFAIR:
* get more people involved: didn't work, there are even less people working on Gump's code base than before. * get people involved from outside the Java community didn't work either. * simplify things Not sure. For me finding the time to actually learn Python idioms to get beyond my very basic understanding (what you get by reading Mark's "Dive into Python") has proven to be almost impossible. I don't know whether it's a matter of the code-base or the language or my abilities - and as such would need to look into Adam's rework. I know that I managed to wrap my head around the Java side of "traditional Gump" in far less time than I've spent on reading the Gumpy code so far - and I still don't get Python Gump. I never tried to really understand all parts of "traditional"'s XSLT sheets, I never had to. But before we try to start all over again. Who is actually willing to write code for Gump as opposed to just toss around ideas - and who really has the time to do so and isn't already overcomitted to too many things? If it turns out to be just Adam anyway, there is little to no reason to change anything. What I'm trying to say is that Python didn't help Gump but I'm not sure it did harm to it either. For most (if not all?) of us Gump is a very interesting project, but a second or third project next to our main project(s) and as such simply suffers from "if I only had time ..." syndroms. Stefan --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
