Re: Cobra: ILU or Orbit?

[Todd Graham Lewis <tlewis mindspring net>]

On Thu, 5 Nov 1998, Greg S. Hayes wrote:

> > ORBit works.  We have total control over its implementation (unlike MICO and
> > ILU).  It's lean (MICO wasn't).  No compelling reason to change.  Not to
> > mention that if we did switch to ILU, we'd have to throw out all the intensive
> > work that's gone into ORBit.  Makes no sense to re-evaluate again at this
> > point.

There is no attribution for this quote, and I do not see the original
message in my gnome mail.  I can probably guess who wrote it, though.

I have to disagree that it makes no sense to re-evaluate.  It may very
well make no sense to change, but given the significant advantages that
ILU has (multi-lingual support foremost among them), I think that it
_does_ make sense to take another look.

> 	Will we be able to gleen some of the programing language interfaces
> from ILU (C++, Java, Guile Scheme, Perl, Lisp, Python, etc) or is the
> ORBit code so drastically different that this would be impossible?

The big question here is on the licensing.  The ILU license requires
simple inclusion of their licensing terms, which I believe is compatible
with the GPL, and so we could use that code.  If anyone has any particular
insight into this issue, then please speak up.

FWIW, I think that having perl support for the GNOME object model would
be an important step.  It would certainly make it easier to communicate
to people what the object model is and why it is a compelling idea.  I am
just waiting for when I can fire up a gnumeric server from perl, abuse it
like a red-headed stepchild, and document my mischeviousness in the FAQ.
Just for that reason, ILU is very attractive.

Can someone say authoritatively whether this is an approved topic of
discussion?

--
Todd Graham Lewis            32°49'N,83°36'W          (800) 719-4664, x2804
******Linux******         MindSpring Enterprises      tlewis@mindspring.net