Re: Putting the 'Mono debate' back on the rails

[Vincent Untz <vuntz gnome org>]

Hi Jeff,

Le samedi 22 juillet 2006, à 00:03, Jeff Waugh a écrit :
>  * Should we include Gtk# in the Bindings suite?
>   - short term
>   - it hasn't been proposed for 2.16, but we could grandfather it in

It has been proposed, IIRC :-)

>   - the release management issues have largely been solved, aside from Gtk#
>     not being split between Platform and Desktop (stable and unstable) APIs
>     which is pretty important in terms of ISV/ISD communication and so on
>   - bindings are a very important part of GNOME, and our value proposition
>   - it seems that few people are concerned about Gtk# adopting the release
>     process and other standards, then being included in our Bindings suite
>   - a social/business/non-technical issue may persist regarding GNOME using
>     or endorsing a Microsoft derived technology; some users/vendors may not
>     appreciate that, to the point that they may choose to disassociate from
>     the GNOME project (this shouldn't be dismissed out of hand)

Yes, we should: we want to let people use their preferred languages to
develop applications that integrate in GNOME.

>  * Should we include Tomboy in the Desktop suite? (completely independently
>    from the fact that it uses Gtk#/Mono)
>   - short term
>   - it has been proposed for 2.16
>   - does it *need* to go in the Desktop suite at all? (genuine question, it
>     may not be necessary to include Tomboy in the Desktop suite to achieve
>     Tomboy's goals)

I'm sorry, I'm not sure I understand this point. It might help to know
what are Tomboy's (or Alex's) goals first :-)

>   - if we say yes here, we depend on the next question (but short term, the
>     next question only starts to matter if we say yes here!)

I'm mixed about tomboy, but mainly because I can't seem to get used to
it ;-) Tomboy has been praised for a long time by a lot of people. This
is a good point for it.

>  * Should Gtk#/Mono applications be accepted into the Desktop suite?
>   - short to medium term
>   - pathological case of 'Desktop suite pressure' (everyone wants their
>     stuff in the Desktop suite because that's how you become enfranchised)
>   - performance (memory and cpu) is a red herring here; we all *know* that
>     we want to start using higher level languages for writing amazing GNOME
>     software, so whether it's Gtk#/Mono, Python, Java, Perl or Brainfuck, we
>     fully acknowledge that we're taking a hit for developer productivity and
>     our ability to deliver awesome software to users. very few pieces of the
>     software on the radar for proposal are central, 'always-on' elements of
>     the desktop experience (think f-spot vs. beagle). performance will be an
>     important metric for inclusion of any software, but it needs to be done
>     on a case by case basis, not from a dogmatic perspective about competing
>     platforms or the idea of using higher level languages at all. that horse
>     has well and truly bolted!
>   - can we resolve the dissonance between delivering a coherent Desktop (a
>     goal of the Desktop suite) and suggesting that vendors deliver multiple
>     vm/language/binding/runtime platforms to satisfy it, and demand that
>     users stomach it too? (this has also been raised as a performance issue)
>   - a social/business/non-technical issue may persist regarding GNOME using
>     or endorsing a Microsoft derived technology; some users/vendors may not
>     appreciate that, to the point that they may choose to disassociate from
>     the GNOME project

You forgot Alvaro's feeling that GNOME is a platform and adding
dependency on another platform might not make sense from a consistency
point of view.
(Point four is similar, but it's not the same.)

We don't have to talk about the other items now. If we do, it'll just
make yet another huge thread without real conclusions...

Vincent

-- 
Les gens heureux ne sont pas pressés.