Thanks Alex for the explanation. Makes a lot more sense to me now. On Wed, Jan 14, 2015 at 6:27 PM, Alexander Larsson <[email protected]> wrote: > > * Some things are hard to build (glibc and other lowlevel stuff), others > are just painful (webkit). Its very nice for app authors if they can > just rely on this stuff and not have to build and bundle it themselves. >
I agree, but this lies ultimately in the definition of "the GNOME platform" (you can change "GNOME" with "KDE" or another platform applications can target). I would expect that the libraries that are declared as part of the platform to be present, regardless of how hard is it to build them. > * Anything we add to the runtime has the potential to conflict with > something bundled by the application (if it needs a different version). > > I've currently made the platform pretty minimal. For instance, it > doesn't even have python or perl. I think we need to carefully consider > anything more we add to it. > I get your point, but I can see this becoming quite tricky: for example, why GJS and Vala and not Python? Ultimately I think the platform definition will need to include a set of bindings, together with the supported version(s) of the interpreters. I wouldn't find it practical e.g. for a python application to also bundle python together with the full pygobject bindings, especially because that might depend on a different version of gobject-introspection/glib/etc. Cosimo
_______________________________________________ gnome-os-list mailing list [email protected] https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-os-list
