Re: Proposing module: PyGTK

[Jeff Waugh <jdub perkypants org>]

<quote who="Mark McLoughlin">

>   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?

> 	I think it all hinges on how we feel about (2) - if the python binding
> should be an officially way to write against the GNOME platform and
> "more blessed" than the other bindings, then I think it belongs in the
> Platform release set. If not, it should stay in the Bindings release
> set.
> 
> 	(1) doesn't matter all that much - if, from (2), it should stay in the
> Bindings release set, then we can fudge it just like you say ... i.e.
> that Desktop modules can depend on pygtk but not the other bindings or
> that pygtk be listed in the Desktop release set too.

Hrm, see, I think that (2) doesn't matter all that much, because we already
make our commitment to external developers clear -> the Bindings suite is
meant to be stable enough that they can rely on it for their applications.

(1) seems to be where things are unclear. Saying that "Desktop modules can
use pygtk, which is in the Bindings suite" seems pretty wishy-washy to me,
compared to the clarity of the Platform and Desktop suites.

- Jeff

-- 
linux.conf.au 2005: Canberra, Australia         http://lca2005.linux.org.au/
 
    "Jane Austen is the Don Burke of romantic comedy." - Andrew Bennetts