Re: Re:Mono bindings a blessed dependency? [Was: Tomboy in 2.16]
On Thu, 2006-04-20 at 23:00 +0200, Vincent Untz wrote: There are other languages bindings in our release set, but none of them have been similarly blessed. Assuming Gtk# is added to the bindings set, should it be a language core apps can use? That's an interesting question - put another way, should the desktop depend on the bindings? I certainly wouldn't have a problem with that - although making GNOME depend on Mono is an issue which would give me more pause than making it depend on gtkmm. The desktop already depends on the bindings since we have some python love in the desktop :-) The question is, do we accept all languages in the desktop, or just a small selection of what's available in the bindings (and which selection?). I think we should allow everything written with a blessed binding, provided that code is optional (like nautilus+beagle integration, for instance), so that we don't force 3rd parties to use them if they don't want to. -- Rodrigo Moya [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Re:Mono bindings a blessed dependency? [Was: Tomboy in 2.16]
Hi Federico, On Thu, 2006-04-20 at 16:17 -0500, Federico Mena Quintero wrote: I mean, nobody can live without solitaire card games, and so we pull in Guile [if not the GTK+ bindings [are they still alive?]]. Not the gtk bindings, no. The gtk bindings are on life support anyways (http://gnu.org/software/guile-gnome/) Cheers, -- Andy Wingo http://wingolog.org/ ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Re:Mono bindings a blessed dependency? [Was: Tomboy in 2.16]
Le jeudi 20 avril 2006 à 22:38 +0200, David Neary a écrit : Hi, Elijah Newren said: But, a more important question: We currently only allow apps using the python bindings into the desktop. Is this true, or is it just because no-one's ever asked? I don't see any reason why a gtkmm app like glom couldn't be considered for the desktop - I wasn't aware any gtkmm apps had actually asked to be incuded in the core desktop release. Hrm. I'd say no-one asked :-) There are other languages bindings in our release set, but none of them have been similarly blessed. Assuming Gtk# is added to the bindings set, should it be a language core apps can use? That's an interesting question - put another way, should the desktop depend on the bindings? I certainly wouldn't have a problem with that - although making GNOME depend on Mono is an issue which would give me more pause than making it depend on gtkmm. The desktop already depends on the bindings since we have some python love in the desktop :-) The question is, do we accept all languages in the desktop, or just a small selection of what's available in the bindings (and which selection?). Vincent -- Les gens heureux ne sont pas pressés. ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Re:Mono bindings a blessed dependency? [Was: Tomboy in 2.16]
On Thu, 2006-04-20 at 22:38 +0200, David Neary wrote: Hi, Elijah Newren said: But, a more important question: We currently only allow apps using the python bindings into the desktop. Is this true, or is it just because no-one's ever asked? We've had extensive discussions about it on this list. Python is the only one that almost nobody objects to, and a lot of people would prefer us not to use too many programming languages in the official Desktop modules. But luckily, not everything needs to be in the Desktop. I certainly wouldn't want to add the political, technical, and strategic baggage for just a note taking utility. [snip] If I was writing something that I intended to become part of the GNOME Desktop, I'd do it in C or Python. Maybe C++ (already used, without gtkmm), but I'd know I was making life difficult for people with that. I hope that the future GNOME Productivity/Office release set is more relaxed about that, but I won't be offended if Glom doesn't get into that. -- Murray Cumming [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.murrayc.com www.openismus.com ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Re:Mono bindings a blessed dependency? [Was: Tomboy in 2.16]
On 4/20/06, Murray Cumming [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Thu, 2006-04-20 at 22:38 +0200, David Neary wrote: Hi, Elijah Newren said: But, a more important question: We currently only allow apps using the python bindings into the desktop. Is this true, or is it just because no-one's ever asked? We've had extensive discussions about it on this list. Python is the only one that almost nobody objects to, and a lot of people would prefer us not to use too many programming languages in the official Desktop modules. But luckily, not everything needs to be in the Desktop. I certainly wouldn't want to add the political, technical, and strategic baggage for just a note taking utility. But lets be honest here. This discussion isn't about tomboy. We need built in search; we're getting some of our best reviews in ages because of our (currently optional) built in search: http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1759,1948842,00.asp?kc=EWRSS03129TX1K616 If this discussion is about any app in particular (it probably shouldn't be, but it probably will be) this discussion is really about beagle, not tomboy. Luis (why, what a big pink elephant you have in your pants^Wroom) ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Re:Mono bindings a blessed dependency? [Was: Tomboy in 2.16]
On Thu, 2006-04-20 at 23:00 +0200, Vincent Untz wrote: The desktop already depends on the bindings since we have some python love in the desktop :-) The question is, do we accept all languages in the desktop, or just a small selection of what's available in the bindings (and which selection?). Accepting Ada bindings because there is a fantastic stock ticker written in Ada is probably not a good reason to do it. Accepting Mono because there is a fantastic search infrastructure and a fantastic photo management app written in Mono *is* a good reason to accept gtk-sharp. I mean, nobody can live without solitaire card games, and so we pull in Guile [if not the GTK+ bindings [are they still alive?]]. Federico ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
