gump-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Adam R. B. Jack" <>
Subject [Forrest Gump] Re: Gump work-in-progress (CleanUp branch)
Date Thu, 17 Jun 2004 17:43:36 GMT

> Adam R. B. Jack wrote:

> > At the same time the Forrest folk divided to do some major (copyless)
> > and they removed the ability to pass work/site location parameters to
> > batch file. Gump used these.
> They will be back somehow, don't worry :-)

No worries. As you said, we probably ought not default to using the batch
mechanism (it is a waste of CPU/resource), and persuade them to use the
dynamic webapplication instead. I've gone one further and remove the
temptation, by removing the ability. ;-)

I won't use it, so don't worry (from my part) about adding it again.

> > Since I've not managed to install Forrest into
> > TomCat (when I once tried it failed, and the Forrest guys were too busy
> > "copyless" to fix it), I started to feel the same pain as others. I
> > decided I could cope no longer with the *effectively mandatory* Forrest
> > dependency for Gump. The inability for Gump to generate pages w/o
> > was too much. As it now stands Gump's page generator can now generate
> > or XDOCS. The XHTML isn't pretty, but with a little CSS it is perfectly
> > adequate [and we get colours again, as it looks w/ might w/ Forrest
> Forrest can use html instead of xdocs to generate the site. This way we
> could have a single generation system.

Again, no worries. We have a single system, it just has a few if/else for
XDOCS verses XHTML. I still want to use Forrest on the public Gump sites,
these XDOCS are just for folks less inclined. It was (when I got ballsy) low
hanging fruit, and ought reduce the on ramp to personal Gumps...



To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message