On Fri, Jan 21, 2011 at 11:01 AM, Shaun McCance <
shaunm gnome org> wrote:
> On Fri, 2011-01-21 at 09:46 -0800, Sandy Armstrong wrote:
>> On Fri, Jan 21, 2011 at 9:31 AM, Andre Klapper <
ak-47 gmx net> wrote:
>> > On Fri, 2011-01-21 at 18:19 +0100, Juanjo Marin wrote:
>> >> AFAIK, one of the cornerstone components of GNOME 3 is GObject
>> >> Introspection. I'd like to know which libraries are supposed to
>> >> support GObject Introspection.
>> >
>> >
http://live.gnome.org/GnomeGoals/AddGObjectIntrospectionSupport has a
>> > list, not necessarily up-to-date.
>> >
>> >> Another question is which bindings/language will be officially endorsed
>> >> by the GNOME project.
>> >
>> > The new, yet-to-release
developer.gnome.org will focus on C, C++,
>> > Python, _javascript_, and Vala.
>>
>> Is C# not a focus of the site because the bindings are behind, because
>> of lack of volunteers to help, or for some other reason?
>
> Actually, I think we're somewhat confusingly conflating the focus
> of
developer.gnome.org with what we initially focused on for the
> developer demo tutorials.
>
> We talked about languages at the developer documentation hackfest.
> We weren't trying to exclude any. We just needed to set priorities.
> We decided not to focus on C# and Mono only because it seems to
> already have a healthy developer community of its own.
>
> If any C# developers want to port any of the demos, or write new
> demos, I'm not going to turn down contributions. Same for Java and
> any other language for which we have reasonably up-to-date bindings.
>
> There is the slight issue of tools. We've been writing tutorials
> assuming you use Anjuta, because using an IDE is a more attractive
> entry point for new developers. I don't think the Anjuta developers
> even try to target C# or Java, because there's no point competing
> with MonoDevelop and Eclipse. So for specific languages, we should
> probably just have the tutorials use other IDEs.
