You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to general@gump.apache.org by Stefano Mazzocchi <st...@apache.org> on 2004/07/08 18:49:35 UTC
[RT] Was python a good idea?
I have started to use python myself because I loved the much faster
try/fail cycle of a scripting language and python looked a lot
friendlier than other scripting languages.
But in my experience, it doesn't scale in terms of complexity as much as
java does.
Also, it seems that there is a lot of black magic in getting it to run
very solidly, while java has years of polishing on seriously loaded
environments.
So, I wonder: what would you think about a gump in java?
--
Stefano.
Re: [RT] Was python a good idea?
Posted by Sam Ruby <ru...@apache.org>.
Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
>
> Java: it's truly cross-platform and the Gump PMC members all know it
> quite well; easy to install
> * cons: dunno
I've had a fetish for both complete reproducibility and for the overall
build environment to be provably unable to effect the build environment.
There were a number of cases where this has come in handy - I've been
able to reproduce problems outside of Gump.
The one notable exception: build.sysclasspath
I'm particularly wary of class loader tricks, particularly when
interacting with things like bootclasspath and compiling against
Apache's version of Xalan. When these tricks work, they are
unquestionably FM(*). When these tricks fail, they are also FM.
- Sam Ruby
(*) F'ing Magic.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@gump.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@gump.apache.org
Re: [RT] Was python a good idea?
Posted by Nick Chalko <ni...@chalko.com>.
Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:
>
>>>
>> I think the main problem we will face in a Java Gump is dependencies.
>> We will have to COMPLETELY resit depending on anything except JDK 1.4
>
>
> Very true, but doable, IMO since we get XML/XSLT/DOM support in there.
>
I might help more if it was in Java, but I don't see the need with out
also changing to more of a pipeline architecture, or tackle using "last
good jar" or something.
Otherwise we are just spinning our wheels.
R,
Nick
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@gump.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@gump.apache.org
Re: [RT] Was python a good idea?
Posted by Stefano Mazzocchi <st...@apache.org>.
Nick Chalko wrote:
> Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
>
>> Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:
>>
>>> I have started to use python myself because I loved the much faster
>>> try/fail cycle of a scripting language and python looked a lot
>>> friendlier than other scripting languages.
>>>
>>> But in my experience, it doesn't scale in terms of complexity as much
>>> as java does.
>>
>>
>>
>> This is my impression also :-(
>>
>>
>> Java: it's truly cross-platform and the Gump PMC members all know it
>> quite well; easy to install
>> * cons: dunno
>>
> I think the main problem we will face in a Java Gump is dependencies. We
> will have to COMPLETELY resit depending on anything except JDK 1.4
Very true, but doable, IMO since we get XML/XSLT/DOM support in there.
--
Stefano.
Re: [RT] Was python a good idea?
Posted by Nick Chalko <ni...@chalko.com>.
Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
> Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:
>
>> I have started to use python myself because I loved the much faster
>> try/fail cycle of a scripting language and python looked a lot
>> friendlier than other scripting languages.
>>
>> But in my experience, it doesn't scale in terms of complexity as much
>> as java does.
>
>
> This is my impression also :-(
>
>
> Java: it's truly cross-platform and the Gump PMC members all know it
> quite well; easy to install
> * cons: dunno
>
I think the main problem we will face in a Java Gump is dependencies.
We will have to COMPLETELY resit depending on anything except JDK 1.4
R,
Nick
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@gump.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@gump.apache.org
Re: [RT] Was python a good idea?
Posted by Nicola Ken Barozzi <ni...@apache.org>.
Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:
> I have started to use python myself because I loved the much faster
> try/fail cycle of a scripting language and python looked a lot
> friendlier than other scripting languages.
>
> But in my experience, it doesn't scale in terms of complexity as much as
> java does.
This is my impression also :-(
> Also, it seems that there is a lot of black magic in getting it to run
> very solidly, while java has years of polishing on seriously loaded
> environments.
>
> So, I wonder: what would you think about a gump in java?
Gump went from Ant to Java and XSLT scripts to Python... now what? ;-)
The question I'm asking myself is: what are we trying to solve? Is Java
the answer to the Pyhon Gump problems and to all the preceding ones?
The first thing I thought was "yeah" but I'm afraid it's something that
will change yet again.
Ant and xslt: it was used because it's used to build, so it seemes
natural to choose it
* cons: complexity (AFAIK)
Scripts with xslt: it was used because scripts basically don't give any
dependency in Unix environments, and are completely
separate from the things that they are building
* cons: obscurity and black magic
Python: it's a language that many developers know or can learn easily
enough, and can be installed in different environments
* cons: it isn't as clear as we thought in the first place and
seems like a PITA to tune and still not trivial to install
Java: it's truly cross-platform and the Gump PMC members all know it
quite well; easy to install
* cons: dunno
Probably before the language we should ask ourselves how the code has to
be structured. Maybe we should evaluate the new DOM-based Gump and
discuss on that.
--
Nicola Ken Barozzi nicolaken@apache.org
- verba volant, scripta manent -
(discussions get forgotten, just code remains)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@gump.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@gump.apache.org
Re: [RT] Was python a good idea?
Posted by Stephen McConnell <mc...@apache.org>.
Adam R. B. Jack wrote:
> Basically, I think Python Gump was the right thing to do 'cos it breathed
> life into a somewhat mundane/infrastructural task. I do think it has become
> a barrier to entry for many, which I find disturbing. As such, I'd not fight
> against folks wanting to re-write in Java ('cos that is clearly quite
> doable).
For what its worth - yes - Python is a barrier to entry for me
personally but I kind of like that. It's my perfect excuse for not
submitting patches and provides me with a good separation of me as tool
user versus developer (something I appreciate given the amount of stuff
I'm already committed to).
On the other hand - a java variant of Gump would be interesting in that
I could envisage closer integration between things like magic and gump
itself. It would also be a lot of fun to play around with gump plugins
- things that lavage the big interconnected picture - but I'm sure this
is possible with Python gump also.
0.02
Cheers, Steve.
--
|---------------------------------------|
| Magic by Merlin |
| Production by Avalon |
| |
| http://avalon.apache.org |
|---------------------------------------|
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@gump.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@gump.apache.org
Re: [RT] Was python a good idea?
Posted by Stephen McConnell <mc...@apache.org>.
Adam R. B. Jack wrote:
> I think we need to enable plug-ins (the easiest way for
> communities to open up to new developers)
+1
--
|---------------------------------------|
| Magic by Merlin |
| Production by Avalon |
| |
| http://avalon.apache.org |
|---------------------------------------|
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@gump.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@gump.apache.org
Re: [RT] Was python a good idea?
Posted by "Adam R. B. Jack" <aj...@trysybase.com>.
> Adam, please, let me start saying this is (as indicated) a random
> though, not a proposal, nor a criticism.
Thanks, but not neccessary, I've had the [RT] myself many times. In the
early days of this (as one gent on IM can attest) there were an uncountable
number of times I bitched "I could re-write Gump in Java in no time". I
still think it is very easy/doable in Java. Maybe it would've been smarter.
> > For me it is a beautify folly; so what
> > better than to experiment with, to teach some Java folks a new tool, to
> > learn Python & get a new perspective on the world?
>
> If it floats your boat, I'm happy. I'm just concerned that the day you
> find something that is more interesting, we are left with a codebase
> that nobody knows how to maintain.
IMHO, the codebase is the problem, not the language. Trust me, I write
Python like I write Java, heck -- I don't know Pythonic Python. ;-) Kinda
like I write Perl, kinda like I write .... -- ya know, it all just all
tastes like chicken. ;-)
Basically, there are a bunch of classes -- maybe too many -- and they need
cleaning up, they need documenting, they need opening up to the rest of you.
> > BTW: Won't Java (with JDK 1.5 feature) + Groovy and Python be about the
same
> > thing sooner or later, anyway? ;-) The similarities will outweigh the
> > differences. ;-)
>
> There is a psycological impact in community dynamics that should not be
> underestimated.
Yup, I hear that. I hope the CleanUp branch was the start of the cleanup, of
a simplification. I think we need to enable plug-ins (the easiest way for
communities to open up to new developers) and I think we need to fully
document/clean the internal design. I've fought so long w/ Python
performance that I've not been able to do that, I now feel I can.
I don't plan on going anywhere until I've documented Gump, and given Python
it's best chance. I think Gumpy is finally warming up & I thank folks for
their continued interest/patience...
regards
Adam
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@gump.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@gump.apache.org
Re: [RT] Was python a good idea?
Posted by Stefano Mazzocchi <st...@apache.org>.
Adam, please, let me start saying this is (as indicated) a random
though, not a proposal, nor a criticism.
As Nicola said, moving from ant+xslt+bash to python was a tremendous
improvement. I just wonder if we should stop there, especially given
that this community is basically java gurus with a little big of python
envy for some of the features (that could be replicated in java, if one
*really* wanted them, btw).
Adam R. B. Jack wrote:
>>I have started to use python myself because I loved the much faster
>>try/fail cycle of a scripting language and python looked a lot
>>friendlier than other scripting languages.
>
> Python is fun to get started with & has some really nice features. My guess
> is I've not even come close to touching the nicer parts ('cos I've yet to
> leave Java thinking far enough behind) and I kinda look forward to getting
> there, some day.
>
>>But in my experience, it doesn't scale in terms of complexity as much as
>>java does.
>
> Sure doesn't.
Well, ask the Zope people about that: not many agree in python-guru land
(and not only for ego or protection of their past decisions).
The strong vs. weak typing debate is vivid in my head.... and you can
say that no matter how deep you go to describe the metadata associated
to your dependencies, there is a point where all of them get weak.
Gump, for example, shows how the time variable makes a strongly typed
system become weakly typed.
Also, if you get pretty heavy with Collections, even Java becomes weakly
typed.
*but* for some reason, java scales better with size and internal
complexity. it feels more solid, at least to me.
> Good practices (unit tests, getting good coverage, pychecker
> and all) can help, but any line/character not touched is a potential
> time-bomb. That said, those good practices are needed w/ any language, they
> just take discipline.
Very true. Fact is this is a community of java programmers which a
tendency for not really caring about religions and just getting the job
done.
I'm not against python or your work, I just wonder if this isn't
blocking all the tremendous java expertiese that we all have.
> Basically, I've come to live w/ that realization &
> stopped trying to take so many short cuts (despite knowing better). Maybe I
> owe Python thanks for that. ;-)
>
> I've found a bunch of stuff I can't do w/ Python, but then I've found
> similar w/ Java. Python is clearly far less mature, but I doubt that will
> last very long. Basically, I have a love/hate relationship w/ Python (I've
> caused myself a lot of hours of pain), but I don't regret having tinkered
> with it.
I can sense that (otherwise, you have would have given up) but I also
see that as much as Gump was a one-man-show (driven by Sam) this gump is
another one man show (driven by you).
I consider myself Gump one of the most incredible innovations of the
entire foundation. I wonder what's going to happen if you go away or
stop being interested in that.
I'm not saying it's your fault, not at all... it's *our* fault that we
don't contribute... but everytime I think about looking at the code the
complexity of all that python just scares me away a little.... so I
postpone and I never do it.
I *really* want to extend gump so that it builds apr httpd and
subversion... but everytime I want to start, some other thing comes up
and that itch goes away.
Yesterday was one of those days and I think I know realize that it's
because of python.
I wonder how many others on this list feel the same, thus my RTs.
>>Also, it seems that there is a lot of black magic in getting it to run
>>very solidly, while java has years of polishing on seriously loaded
>>environments.
>
>
> That could easily be me. I chose to do some
>
>
>>So, I wonder: what would you think about a gump in java?
>
>
> Good idea? Maybe. Personally, I've invested so much in Python Gump to want
> to back off (although 6 months ago I'd've been there in a heart beat).
> Personally, I feel Gump is beautifully irrelevant -- if it dropped of the
> face of the planet few people would notice -- but when it find issues &
> helps out, it is a sweet thing.
Personally, I think gump is the most important project of the entire
ASF, but it will take a few more years and a lot more work in certain
other directions to show that.
> For me it is a beautify folly; so what
> better than to experiment with, to teach some Java folks a new tool, to
> learn Python & get a new perspective on the world?
If it floats your boat, I'm happy. I'm just concerned that the day you
find something that is more interesting, we are left with a codebase
that nobody knows how to maintain.
> BTW: Won't Java (with JDK 1.5 feature) + Groovy and Python be about the same
> thing sooner or later, anyway? ;-) The similarities will outweigh the
> differences. ;-)
There is a psycological impact in community dynamics that should not be
underestimated.
> Basically, I think Python Gump was the right thing to do 'cos it breathed
> life into a somewhat mundane/infrastructural task.
True.
> I do think it has become a barrier to entry for many,
> which I find disturbing.
Bingo.
> As such, I'd not fight
> against folks wanting to re-write in Java ('cos that is clearly quite
> doable).
Cool.
NOTE: I *DO NOT* have a plan to rewrite Gump in java anytime soon, I
don't think I have the energy and itchness for it.
--
Stefano.
Re: [RT] Was python a good idea?
Posted by "Adam R. B. Jack" <aj...@trysybase.com>.
> I have started to use python myself because I loved the much faster
> try/fail cycle of a scripting language and python looked a lot
> friendlier than other scripting languages.
Python is fun to get started with & has some really nice features. My guess
is I've not even come close to touching the nicer parts ('cos I've yet to
leave Java thinking far enough behind) and I kinda look forward to getting
there, some day.
> But in my experience, it doesn't scale in terms of complexity as much as
> java does.
Sure doesn't. Good practices (unit tests, getting good coverage, pychecker
and all) can help, but any line/character not touched is a potential
time-bomb. That said, those good practices are needed w/ any language, they
just take discipline. Basically, I've come to live w/ that realization &
stopped trying to take so many short cuts (despite knowing better). Maybe I
owe Python thanks for that. ;-)
I've found a bunch of stuff I can't do w/ Python, but then I've found
similar w/ Java. Python is clearly far less mature, but I doubt that will
last very long. Basically, I have a love/hate relationship w/ Python (I've
caused myself a lot of hours of pain), but I don't regret having tinkered
with it.
> Also, it seems that there is a lot of black magic in getting it to run
> very solidly, while java has years of polishing on seriously loaded
> environments.
That could easily be me. I chose to do some
> So, I wonder: what would you think about a gump in java?
Good idea? Maybe. Personally, I've invested so much in Python Gump to want
to back off (although 6 months ago I'd've been there in a heart beat).
Personally, I feel Gump is beautifully irrelevant -- if it dropped of the
face of the planet few people would notice -- but when it find issues &
helps out, it is a sweet thing. For me it is a beautify folly; so what
better than to experiment with, to teach some Java folks a new tool, to
learn Python & get a new perspective on the world?
BTW: Won't Java (with JDK 1.5 feature) + Groovy and Python be about the same
thing sooner or later, anyway? ;-) The similarities will outweigh the
differences. ;-)
Basically, I think Python Gump was the right thing to do 'cos it breathed
life into a somewhat mundane/infrastructural task. I do think it has become
a barrier to entry for many, which I find disturbing. As such, I'd not fight
against folks wanting to re-write in Java ('cos that is clearly quite
doable).
regards,
Adam
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@gump.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@gump.apache.org
Re: [RT] Was python a good idea?
Posted by "Adam R. B. Jack" <aj...@trysybase.com>.
Stefan wrote:
> 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.
But we have a lot more people 'sniffing around'. ;-) That said, likely this
is 'cos the daily/nightly Gump coverage has continued to climb (which is a
testiment to Gumpmeister work, not language).
I wonder if part of the problem is that Gump is pretty unique and extensions
are not obvious. Maybe we need to create a Gump TODO (wiki) page, where we
list the extensions we'd like to do. If we had a list of such extensions we
could measure the language/accessibilty of Gump to those goals. We could
track what folks are struggling with, if they are.
Likely I've been too available to fix problems (and not made room/left a gap
for others), but that is 'cos stubornness won't let me walk away when the
mess is mine. I didn't know Python, I didn't know Gump well enough, I was
overly optomistic in my abilities. I created a monolithic mess (that worked,
basically), but that was a barrier.
I don't think Python is the reason that no more folks are working on Gump
code.
> * get people involved from outside the Java community
>
> didn't work either.
Have we really tried yet? Have we solicited? Have we even picked a
languare/tool/codebase we wish to go after? If we wanted to compile C, via
Ant or whatever, let's do it. Heck, I'm starting to think a Python Gump (for
Gumping Python) would be a sweet idea. Basically, I think we've not given
this any focus.
Personally, I do feel that the language plays no part in how Gump can do
this, other than perhaps appealing to people's curiosities.
> * 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.
Python Gump may not be simpler than traditional, but reading archives (on
why to start Python Gump) I see one problem with traditional was that it was
too simple, and had weak error reporting/correction. Python Gump has
simplified the installation (far less tools, reasonably more
portable/consistent), and has far more debuggable output (no editing
monsterous bat|sh files to look for CLASSPATHs, better remote debugging of
builds). The internals might not be simpler, but usage is (IMHO).
I really wish I could go back in time and understand what was so hard about
Python. I swear I write Java-like middle-of-the-road style Python (beaner
methods, etc.). I just don't see that the language is hard to read. Heck,
when I look at this code I see Java, just with less syntax. Gosh, I wish I
could see what is causing folks grief here, I really do. Would people be
open enough to post issues here, and I'll work with them to get past them?
I'm no Pythonic Guru, but I would willingly help explain any of the
relatively simple Python in Gump code.
> 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.
I know I need to take 'full credit' for this. Heck, Sam (Mr Gump/Mr Python)
came back and dabbled, and then walked away 'cos it was too complicated (and
one couldn't simple edit/run/tinker). Sam clearly had no Python barrier, the
problem was the codebase/design.
Heck, Nicola was happily hacking a Gump GUI in Python (with no prior Python
experience) and he's no longer able to follow what I did to the code. Sure,
the code at that point did little to nothing (but load metadata) and I've
had to add a lot to make it actually launch tools, etc. Unfortunately I went
overboard (and got too focused in Forrest presentation).
I honestly feel I can fix that, and make this code acessible. Again, I feel
it is the codebase not the language (for most folk).
> 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.
I didn't come at ASF interested in one project, I run a lot of ASF software
and hate jar hell (read: early days of AXIS on C-L in my App Server, yuk!).
I hate jar hell (hence Depot Version, hence Depot) and I came to Gump with
that focus. Gump was a passion before it came (via Python) my primary focus.
It may seem daft that I make Gump my primary project, but I see it as the
best way I can help the most projects (I use a lot of them).
I don't think I can make 'a big difference' to projects individually, so I
continue to work on Gump. I admit a lot of it is stubornness, I refuse to
leave a mess, but it is also passion. I want Gump to grow and succeed. I
think there is 'untapped potential' w/ Gump, something that can really
(significantly) contribute to OSS/software development. I feel we are close
to being able to explore that potential (now the core is getting
stable/clean). I've found a niche for my contributions, in Gump, and I want
to see it through to the end...
> 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.
Heck, rightly or wrongly, Python Gump contributed to take us TLP. :)
I know I've considered a Java Gump, and I know there have been a lot of
times I've bitched that Python isn't mature enough, but I do not think I've
allowed Python Gump the chance it deserved. I don't think we can blame
Python for the past 6 months, I don't think it has had it's chance.
I think that Python does bring a certain something that Java can't. I think
Python allows a separation from the languages it builds, and tools that it
uses, that is healthy to it's goals. I think that Python has the potential
for developer productivity (and fun/quick entensions) above and beyond Java.
I think that Python is (despite imperfections) a good tool for this task.
I don't want to see us throw away the period of effort that has gone into
Python Gump. I feel a re-write in Java would gain little or nothing from the
Python implementation ('cos folks don't know it) so we'd not even have
benefitted as a prototype. Basically, I can stand to see the effort thrown
away when it has finally reached a point where it could flourish.
I ask that folks give me 6 months (no more) to attempt to rectify the issues
with Python Gump & it's community interactions. If folks will give me that
time, and continue to be open minded to this approach, I'd greatly
appreciate that & work to document/open.
That said, I am but one person on this project, and not even a founder.
Again, I won't fight a re-write, if folks see it as the best course for the
project.
regards,
Adam
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@gump.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@gump.apache.org
Re: [RT] Was python a good idea?
Posted by "matthew.hawthorne" <ma...@apache.org>.
Although I'm not an active part of this list, the only reason I
subscribed was because Gump was being rewritten in Python. I'm a Java
programmer who is learning Python and I thought that Gump may teach me a
few things. Unfortunately, I haven't really had the time to look over
the code -- but I'm hoping that I'll get the chance soon.
P.S. I have found the "Python Cookbook" to be pretty good. It's
shown me how to do a lot of cool things with Python.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@gump.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@gump.apache.org
Re: [RT] Was python a good idea?
Posted by Niclas Hedhman <ni...@hedhman.org>.
Stefan Bodewig wrote:
> 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.
Well, Gump have sparked interest with me and Stephen, and we will
probably remain 'power users' of Gump... SO...
If Gumpic :o) can be designed with modularity in mind, and perhaps
even incorporate some of the findings that Stephen has collected while
working with Gump integration into Avalon Magic build system, I think
you can expect a reasonable degree of help from both of us for a Java
implementation.
With Python, I won't even try... sorry...
Cheers
Niclas
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@gump.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@gump.apache.org
Re: MagicBuilder
Posted by Stephen McConnell <mc...@apache.org>.
Leo Simons wrote:
> Stephen McConnell wrote:
>
>> Leo Simons wrote:
>>
>>> Stefan Bodewig wrote:
>>>
>>>> I tend to agree with most of what has been said in this thread so far.
>>>
>>>
>>> thought I'd chime in: "what he said".
>>>
>>> I really want to learn python well enough to write more than simple
>>> shell scripts using it. Isaid that over a year ago. Here I am, still
>>> saying it. One has to wonder whether I'll still be saying it next
>>> year. In the meantime, I'm a gump junkie without the Power to
>>> Contribute.
>>
>>
>> Would you like to take care of the MagicBuilder?
>
>
> Noooo, not another TODO item!!!! :-D
>
> If you add it to jira, it gets pushed on the TODO list, whatever it is.
> What's a magic builder? (I'm behind on email again...) Unfortunately
> that's still no guarantee for it to get done.
A magic builder is just a copy of an AntBuilder (ant.py) with some minor
tweaks concerning classpath and properties that are passed to ant. Adam
Jack provided a summary of the changes needed in this email:
http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=gump&m=108951401427698&w=2
Cheers, Steve.
--
|---------------------------------------|
| Magic by Merlin |
| Production by Avalon |
| |
| http://avalon.apache.org |
|---------------------------------------|
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@gump.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@gump.apache.org
MagicBuilder (was: Re: [RT] Was python a good idea?)
Posted by Leo Simons <ls...@jicarilla.org>.
Stephen McConnell wrote:
> Leo Simons wrote:
>
>> Stefan Bodewig wrote:
>>
>>> I tend to agree with most of what has been said in this thread so far.
>>
>> thought I'd chime in: "what he said".
>>
>> I really want to learn python well enough to write more than simple
>> shell scripts using it. Isaid that over a year ago. Here I am, still
>> saying it. One has to wonder whether I'll still be saying it next
>> year. In the meantime, I'm a gump junkie without the Power to Contribute.
>
> Would you like to take care of the MagicBuilder?
Noooo, not another TODO item!!!! :-D
If you add it to jira, it gets pushed on the TODO list, whatever it is.
What's a magic builder? (I'm behind on email again...) Unfortunately
that's still no guarantee for it to get done.
- LSD
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@gump.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@gump.apache.org
Re: [RT] Was python a good idea?
Posted by Stephen McConnell <mc...@apache.org>.
Leo Simons wrote:
> Stefan Bodewig wrote:
>
>> I tend to agree with most of what has been said in this thread so far.
>
>
> thought I'd chime in: "what he said".
>
> I really want to learn python well enough to write more than simple
> shell scripts using it. I said that over a year ago. Here I am, still
> saying it. One has to wonder whether I'll still be saying it next year.
> In the meantime, I'm a gump junkie without the Power to Contribute.
Would you like to take care of the MagicBuilder?
Steve.
--
|---------------------------------------|
| Magic by Merlin |
| Production by Avalon |
| |
| http://avalon.apache.org |
|---------------------------------------|
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@gump.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@gump.apache.org
Re: [RT] Was python a good idea?
Posted by Leo Simons <ls...@jicarilla.org>.
Stefan Bodewig wrote:
> I tend to agree with most of what has been said in this thread so far.
thought I'd chime in: "what he said".
I really want to learn python well enough to write more than simple
shell scripts using it. I said that over a year ago. Here I am, still
saying it. One has to wonder whether I'll still be saying it next year.
In the meantime, I'm a gump junkie without the Power to Contribute.
- LSD
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@gump.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@gump.apache.org
Re: [RT] Was python a good idea?
Posted by Stefan Bodewig <bo...@apache.org>.
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: general-unsubscribe@gump.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@gump.apache.org