Re: Time to heat up the new module discussion

[Alvaro Lopez Ortega <alvaro 0x50 org>]

Ben Maurer wrote:

>>  Yeah, 100% agree. That is exactly the problem: applications would
>>  use another framework rather than the one that they are suppose to
>>  use (we are speaking about GNOME apps).
>
> libxml is an XML library for *C* apps. It's not designed to be
> usable in any other language.

  Agree. So they use their libraries with their language. That's the
  point.

>>  I understand the desktop framework as the common infrastructure in
>>  which almost all the desktop applications are based on. If we move
>>  from a scheme in which there is an unique group of common stuff to
>>  one in which there are a few of them (GNOME, Python, Mono, Java?) it
>>  may become "a little" messy. IMO.
>
> We're not proposing Java. Don't try to inflate your numbers by putting
> stuff not under consideration in there.

  Of course, that was just an example. Actually, I put an
  interrogation mark after Java.  However, if we accept the dependency
  of extra frameworks, it could end up being like that in a couple of
  years, so it wasn't a crazy idea either.

> First, let's observe that almost everyone seems to desire a move in
> the managed code direction. Microsoft has invested quite a bit of
> engineering effort into their Vista based framework. Sun is
> investing by improving Java on the desktop (including by making
> Swing apps look native in gtk, for Mustang/Java 6. This work is very
> impressive).

  IBM and Sun design processors, and that doesn't mean that we're on
  that business.

  BTW, if you read Sun's people arguments on this thread, it seems
  that they don't like much the idea.

> Novell's desktop now includes many Mono based applications.

  That is the right way. Novell should take advantage for their
  technology, not try force the rest to adopt it.

-- 
Greetings, alo.
http://www.alobbs.com