Re: Time to heat up the new module discussion (from digest)

[David Nielsen <david lovesunix net>]

fre, 14 07 2006 kl. 19:50 +0200, skrev David Neary:
> Hi,
> 
> Darren Kenny wrote:
> > I'm not totally against C# applications themselves - what I am for is choice. I
> > don't think any thing other than C should  be part of Core GNOME - to put
> > anything other than C into here can cause loads of problems - what happens if we
> > start to do all our main development in C# (or anything else for that matter)
> > going forward, then less and less of GNOME will be re-usable without Mono since
> > all the innovation will be in C#. This is why I think we need a definition of
> > what is core...
> 
> This is the core of the discussion, and strikes at the heart of another
> more important question. What is GNOME?
> 
> Is GNOME a platform on which we allow distributors to develop the
> desktop experience, or is GNOME a project where we build that desktop,
> and enable repackaging and differentiation of distributors on a complete
> free software computing environment?
> 
> It appears to me that significant blocks of functionality are being
> written in languages other than C for GNOME (this is hardly surprising,
> C development is slower than development in most modern high-level
> languages), and those applications are being built outside our
> community. I'd like GTK#, java-gnome, gtkmm, pygtk and ruby-gtk
> developers to consider themselves GNOME developers. I'd prefer GNOME to
> be a pick'n'mix of complete usable applications rather than a slimline
> core platform which generates no excitement.

I'm currently only a translator within GNOME but if I was one day to
contribute more time, I would definately do it using MonoDevelop and C#
as I find C# to be a fun language to program in and MonoDevelop is by
far the IDE I like the most which is available in a GNOME environment.

Now that doesn't mean Mono shouldn't be optimized, however when I look
at what takes up the most memory on my system, those are C applications
- Epiphany and Evolution (which also eats up an additional 80 megs just
for spamassassin), these key in at a combined 240 megs (number taken
from the system monitor application so they are sure to be accurate like
Boy George is straight). In comparison Tomboy after running for days
sits at 40 megs (it was 25 megs earlier so I suspect it might be
leaking).

Tomboy is a fantastic application, after discovering it I quite
literally changed the way I work - keeping it out of the desktop because
of ressource consumption concerns that can be fixed would be a bad
decision for users. We are still catering to those right?

- David Nielsen