Nathanael Schärli wrote:
> Anyway, I think it would be the best if we would get Ned's opinion on this
> because he should know best what's the current state of the Monticello
> version and how much work it would take to actually make an "official" Genie
> package. It might even be that Ned has a working version of the package
> lying around somewhere. Otherwise, I'll try to allocate some time to look at
> this and come up with a quick fix as soon as possible. 

Hi Nathanael, I agree.. thanks!

 > Sorry for not replying earlier. I actually do still read this list 
(at least
 > I try to), but since I was quite busy at work today, I wasn't able to 
reply
 > earlier.

No problem.. no haste intended, I was just quibbling with Stef over the 
fact that I had cc'd you on the original post and he hadn't seen it (and 
trying to flush out any strange behaviour by the list or my mail client.)

Best,
-Simon