RE: The bake-off

> you must confuse me with someone else! 
> 
> I didn't have any package to defend ...
> 
> Additionally, I was just refering to *the discussion* and not to 
> package specific things.

Sorry, you're right. I think I was thinking of Albert Hofkamp, who came up
with an alternative to Optik. But as I said, I never quite followed what he
was trying to suggest was the benefit for his package compared to Optik.

I agree that things sort of lost momentum on the SIG. But I see that as more
a sign that Optik had "won" than anything else. I would have expected the
next step to be for Greg to post some sort of "We have a winner" summary of
the SIG's conclusions, and then take up the process of getting Optik moved
into the Python library. I'd assumed that Greg was being (politely)
cautious, so as not to be seen to be jumping the gun in favour of his
package.

Paul.