I have made these changes now. See how you like it and feel free to
change anything directly.

It's a bit less vague now, so some of the information might be wrong,
but that's probably the only way to make people tell us the correct
On Fri, 2004-02-27 at 11:07, Murray Cumming wrote:
> On Fri, 2004-02-27 at 10:27, Matthias Clasen wrote:
> > Murray,
> > 
> > are you still maintaining that page ?
> Yes, I update it when people email language-bindings gnome org  It's
> almost all the opinions of the individual binding maintainers though.
> >  It seems to reflect the activity
> > status of the current bindings very well; e.g. the gtk2-perl bindings seem to be
> > very actively developed and cover nearly all of 2.4, still they are hidden
> > somewhere in the middle.
> Yes, I need to update the page to show the new GNOME Bindings release
> set.
> >  On the other hand there is the slightly dubious
> > division into 
> > "official" and "other" bindings, which seems to be out-of-sync with the
> > "platform bindings" effort.
> Yes, I will replace the dubious "official" section with some "GNOME
> Platform Bindings" section. It means that gnome-python will not look so
> good anymore, but they have not yet wrapped 2.2 so that's not so
> unreasonable.
> > May I propose to 
> > 
> > - ditch the "official" vs. "other" section split
> > - put all bindings in an alphabetically sorted table
> > - add a column "included in GNOME platform bindings", which replaces the
> > "official" thing
> I think I'd prefer to keep them at the top, because the difference in
> quality between the really-used bindings and the others is quite huge.
> > - add some table border to make reading this long table a bit easier.
> Yes.
> Thanks.
Murray Cumming
murrayc murrayc com

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]