Re: Proposing module: PyGTK

["Murray Cumming" <murrayc murrayc com>]

> 	Well, I think there's two sides to this:
>
>   1) The expectations we want to set to modules in the Desktop release -
>      i.e. we want those modules to feel free to depend on pygtk, but not
>      any of the other members of the bindings release.
>
>   2) The expectations we want to set to external developers - i.e. do we
>      want the python binding to be "just another GNOME binding" or do
>      we want it to enjoy a higher status above the other bindings?
[snip]

In the case of 2, we would still not be saying that it's good enough for
our base implementation of our own Platform, because we have obviously not
chosen a high-level language for Platform APIs, and IMHO we are unlikely
to reach that consenus any time soon.

So then 2 does not seem very interesting or worthwhile:
- it's not the impossible decision that people are waiting to hear, and
- it makes no difference to 3rd-party application developers, who can
already use whatever they like, and who are already able to do so because
of the API promises in the Bindings release set.

Process is so dull.

Murray Cumming
murrayc murrayc com
www.murrayc.com
www.openismus.com