Re: Mono bindings a blessed dependency? [Was: Tomboy in 2.16]
- From: Jamie McCracken <jamiemcc blueyonder co uk>
- To: Rodrigo Moya <rodrigo gnome-db org>
- Cc: Vincent Untz <vuntz gnome org>, desktop-devel-list gnome org
- Subject: Re: Mono bindings a blessed dependency? [Was: Tomboy in 2.16]
- Date: Fri, 21 Apr 2006 11:17:41 +0100
Rodrigo Moya wrote:
On Thu, 2006-04-20 at 23:00 +0200, Vincent Untz wrote:
There are other languages bindings
in our release set, but none of them have been similarly blessed.
Assuming Gtk# is added to the bindings set, should it be a language
core apps can use?
That's an interesting question - put another way, should the desktop
depend on the bindings? I certainly wouldn't have a problem with that -
although making GNOME depend on Mono is an issue which would give me
more pause than making it depend on gtkmm.
The desktop already depends on the bindings since we have some python
love in the desktop :-) The question is, do we accept all languages in
the desktop, or just a small selection of what's available in the
bindings (and which selection?).
I think we should allow everything written with a blessed binding,
provided that code is optional (like nautilus+beagle integration, for
instance), so that we don't force 3rd parties to use them if they don't
Definitely not - that is unmanageable and unfair.
If something is optional it means there are alternatives and one
alternative should not block another (as then an inferior alternative
could block a vastly superior alternative getting into the desktop as
would be the case with beagle and Tracker)
And if you allow all alternatives in you end up with a mess!
Mr Jamie McCracken
] [Thread Prev