Re: Where we stand in regard to the future platform / desktop technology

[jamie <jamiemcc blueyonder co uk>]

On Sun, 2004-03-28 at 11:54, Markus Bertheau wrote:
> There seem to be three models:
> 
> (1) C/C++/Python
> 
> - no known legal issues
> 
> (2) JVM
> 
> - legal situation unclear
> 
> (3) Mono
> 
> - legal situation unclear
> 
> As it stands, if we have to decide now, we have no other choice than
> (1).

yes the proposal by Havoc for 2.8 was C and Python with GObject getting
enough type information for full introspection. I think most people
agree this is desirable and if no one objects then we should go forward
with this as a short term solution.

For Gnome 3, the options increase to having C and Mono (with the Python
in 2.8 running on Mono).

An open source high performance JVM is years away so you would have to
wait for Gnome 4 or Gnome 5 for this option unless someone can persuade
SUN to let go of its "precious" or alternatively get them to donate code
for JITs and other missing bits. Running a JVM without such JITs as a
short term solution is not a good idea (would be lot slower than
python).


jamie.


> 
> As I understand it Novell is working on making clear the legal situation
> with Novell. If they finish with an answer that satisfies the
> communities goals, then we have another option to choose from, namely
> (2).
> 
> I don't know anyone that is working on making clear the legal situation
> for the JVM. When someone does and succeeds, we'll have the option (3)
> too.
> 
> So if we end up having a choice, we (the community) should base it on
> technical arguments, not political. And I would like to ask companys to
> refrain from trying to force their (politically motivated) opinion on
> the community. Note that I'm not saying that any one company does that
> at present.
> 

> So at the moment there's nothing to argue about.