Daniel Carrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Well, the idea was to attract developers who would not be willing to
> tackle Scheme but might be willing to use something else.
If you know python or ruby or perl then you can learn scheme.
Not being _willing_ to learn scheme is a different issue, and
has nothing to do with simplicity.
> Here's another thought. If it's possible to allow plugins in Python/Ruby
> that might attract developers who can extend functionality which would
> free the present developers to fix the existing problems with the current
> code-base. Then again, this might be more trouble than it's worth. It's
> just a thought.
It's more trouble than it's worth -- maintaining the scheme bindings
are hard enough. Now you want us to maintain bindings to how many
other languages?
Again, I ask "to what affect?" What is the cost/benefit ratio of all
this additional work? If someone else wants to create those bindings
and is willing to maintain them, great. But gnucash already has a
dependency hell -- adding more isn't something that users would like.
-derek
--
Derek Atkins, SB '93 MIT EE, SM '95 MIT Media Laboratory
Member, MIT Student Information Processing Board (SIPB)
URL: http://web.mit.edu/warlord/ PP-ASEL-IA N1NWH
[EMAIL PROTECTED] PGP key available
_______________________________________________
gnucash-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.gnucash.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel
