On Fri, 5 Mar 2021, Daniel Wagner wrote: > On 05.03.21 16:29, John Kacur wrote: > > How about --json ? > > Description, "Optionally output final results to FILENAME in JSON format" > > Ah, that reminds me why I opted for output initially. We had the discussion to > support different output formats. But if we just stick with JSON, --json is > way better. > > What about finishing this series first and then I send the output -> json > cleanup? > > Fair enough. John
