On Mon, 19 Mar 2001, Naba Kumar wrote:Actually, that *is* what he was saying. If you're gonna quote me, quote everything relevant.
> Ben Ford wrote:
> > > > This will result in
> > > > availability of a ton of
> > > > feature-rich, polished and intelligent and helpful
> > > > utilities available with
> > > > gnome.
> >
> > And it will also result in at least one fewer Gnome user. Me.
>
> And me. :-).This is _very_ contra productive. You don't give any reasons why you are
against this. If there are programers who know python or perl very well,
there is no reason why they shouldn't write Gnome programs in these
languages. If _you_ don't want to use any of these scripting languages in
your programs just don't do it! And no one will force you to use utilities
written with those programing languages.Jens
> Ben Ford wrote:
>
> > > > What I propose is to make
> > > > popular scripting languages like Python and Perl (I
> > > > have nothing against lisp
> > > > dialects, but there are much more programmers who
> > > > know Python or Perl than who
> > > > know lisp) a requirement of gnome
(so e.g. gnome
> > > > won't run without them),
and
> > > > so that bindings for these languages are shipped
> > > > with gnome, and it would be
> > > > highly appreciated from utility authors to write
> > > > their utils not in C, but in
> > > > either Perl or Python. This will result in
> > > > availability of a ton of
> > > > feature-rich, polished and intelligent and helpful
> > > > utilities available with
> > > > gnome.