[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       kde-core-devel
Subject:    Re: Guidance in KDE Admin
From:       "Nicolas Ternisien" <nicolas.ternisien () gmail ! com>
Date:       2008-03-26 23:51:58
Message-ID: ccba71b50803261651v53eeacc4kfefb6594566ac5d7 () mail ! gmail ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

Yes, IIRC, it was a request from Aaron Siego to open KDE main tree to other
languages than C++. Python perfectly fits in my opinion this request. What
is your main problem about this Leo ? Of course, if it was Mono or Java, I
think the problem should be different (particularly Mono, because Java 7 is
going to be GPL2), but in this case, this is a open source language without
any problem, and really well supported.

On Wed, Mar 26, 2008 at 9:45 PM, Sebastian Kuegler <sebas@kde.org> wrote:

> On Wednesday 26 March 2008 21:17:53 Leo Savernik wrote:
> > Am Mittwoch, 26. M=E4rz 2008 schrieb Nicolas Ternisien:
> > > >  >  All modules need porting to KDE4 (and could make nice showcases
> for
> > > > the Python >  bindings then). Mountconfig would also need porting t=
o
> > > > Solid (it already uses
> >
> > [...]
> >
> > > No other opinion ? If you agree, just say Yes/+1 or No/-1, just to be
> > > sure this is something useful, and that will help KDE Admin being mor=
e
> > > interesting.
> >
> > It looks like Guidance introduces a hard python dependency into KDE. I
> > don't particularly like that. Is there any precedent that justifies a
> hard
> > runtime python dependency?
>
> No, it'd be the first. IIRC, it was talked about some time ago though tha=
t
> this is actually wanted. (Granted, not for core apps, but in general to
> open
> up more for non-C++ languages and developers.)
> --
> sebas
>
>  http://www.kde.org | http://vizZzion.org |  GPG Key ID: 9119 0EF9
>

[Attachment #3 (text/html)]

Yes, IIRC, it was a request from Aaron Siego to open KDE main tree to other languages \
than C++. Python perfectly fits in my opinion this request. What is your main problem \
about this Leo ? Of course, if it was Mono or Java, I think the problem should be \
different (particularly Mono, because Java 7 is going to be GPL2), but in this case, \
this is a open source language without any problem, and really well supported.<br> \
<br><div class="gmail_quote">On Wed, Mar 26, 2008 at 9:45 PM, Sebastian Kuegler \
&lt;<a href="mailto:sebas@kde.org">sebas@kde.org</a>&gt; wrote:<br><blockquote \
class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt \
0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"> <div><div></div><div class="Wj3C7c">On Wednesday 26 \
March 2008 21:17:53 Leo Savernik wrote:<br> &gt; Am Mittwoch, 26. März 2008 schrieb \
Nicolas Ternisien:<br> &gt; &gt; &gt; &nbsp;&gt; &nbsp;All modules need porting to \
KDE4 (and could make nice showcases for<br> &gt; &gt; &gt; the Python &gt; \
&nbsp;bindings then). Mountconfig would also need porting to<br> &gt; &gt; &gt; Solid \
(it already uses<br> &gt;<br>
&gt; [...]<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; &gt; No other opinion ? If you agree, just say Yes/+1 or No/-1, just to be<br>
&gt; &gt; sure this is something useful, and that will help KDE Admin being more<br>
&gt; &gt; interesting.<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; It looks like Guidance introduces a hard python dependency into KDE. I<br>
&gt; don&#39;t particularly like that. Is there any precedent that justifies a \
hard<br> &gt; runtime python dependency?<br>
<br>
</div></div>No, it&#39;d be the first. IIRC, it was talked about some time ago though \
that<br> this is actually wanted. (Granted, not for core apps, but in general to \
open<br> up more for non-C++ languages and developers.)<br>
<font color="#888888">--<br>
</font><div><div></div><div class="Wj3C7c">sebas<br>
<br>
&nbsp;<a href="http://www.kde.org" target="_blank">http://www.kde.org</a> | <a \
href="http://vizZzion.org" target="_blank">http://vizZzion.org</a> | &nbsp;GPG Key \
ID: 9119 0EF9<br> </div></div></blockquote></div><br>



[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]