[orignally and accidentally just sent to Owen Taylor in private] Dear Owen,
2009/11/2 Owen Taylor <otay...@redhat.com>: > GJS and SpiderMonkey: Currently gnome-shell is build using the > GJS bindings to Javascript which work with the Mozilla SpiderMonkey > Javascript engine. The comparison to seed/JavascriptCore has been > discussed quite a bit in the past, I don't want to go into in > detail here; basically the advantages for us are: I have not been following the GNOME shell discussions, but I wonder why we JavaScript is needed at all. Now that some of the core modules exhibit Python, suddently JavaScript is discussed. I have always considered programming and script languages as interchangeable (besides syntactic and refactoring sugar), so we need a good argument for adding new ones that just make the dependency stack larger and larger. I'd really strongly opt for "C + Mono + one scripting language" or "C + Mono" or "C + one scripting language" when we talk about the core desktop. I see no advantage whatsoever in a Babylonian approach -- unless you convince me with good arguments. > In one sense SpiderMonkey is not a problematic dependency; > SpiderMonkey is distributed as part of xulrunner, and will be > present on virtually any computer where GNOME is available. Now that both the Epiphany web browser and Yelp [1] moved away from Gecko to WebKit, it seems to be very odd that we suddently introduce a XULrunner dependency again. Is this a political decision due to the collaboration of the GNOME foundation and the Mozilla foundation that was once announced? Ay best regards, Christian Neumair [1] http://git.gnome.org/cgit/yelp/commit/?h=yelp-3-0&id=3da814fdf5c3dd8d209574fdeb99cc2cf6cbdfb4 _______________________________________________ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list