Re: Focusing on innovation re: mono, python et al

[Shaun McCance <shaunm gnome org>]

On Mon, 2006-07-17 at 09:33 -0400, JP Rosevear wrote:
> On Mon, 2006-07-17 at 11:30 +0200, Murray Cumming wrote:
> > > On 7/17/06, Murray Cumming <murrayc murrayc com> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> > Which makes me wonder why we are able to bless some applications and
> > >> > not others. The point of blessing the application is saying that this
> > >> > application meets the gnome standards for X,Y and Z and has a release
> > >> > shedule that coincides with the gnome platform release.
> > >>
> > >> And that people will work on it to bug-triage it, bug fix it, translate
> > >> it, document it, UI review it, integrate it, and present it, which is
> > >> what
> > >> that release schedule makes possible.
> > >
> > > And so why does what language it is written in matter to this blessing
> > > at all then?
> > 
> > - Multiple languages make the work harder by requiring people to know more
> > languages
> 
> Only for bug fixing part, the language for development has no bearings
> on triage, translation, ui review, documentation, etc.

To be perfectly fair, both .Net and Python have different
format strings than those used by printf.  So there is some
extra burden on translators.  So including Mono apps would
give translators four different format string conventions
to learn (counting the crap I made them learn for XSLT.)

It can also have an impact on bug triaging.  A lot of bug
folks do basically understand stack traces, and they're able
to triage accordingly.  On more than one occasion, I've had
bug squad members identify duplicates that the simple dup
finder didn't catch.

Neither of these are deal-breakers.  But they are do make
work a bit harder, and they shouldn't be ignored.

--
Shaun