[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: when and why did python(-minimal) become essential?

Joe Wreschnig <piman@debian.org> writes:

> There's nothing that prevents us saying "we aren't going to support
> every high-level language" and stick to more than one (we already stick
> to two -- sh and Perl). It just means "I'd like to write scripts in X"
> alone isn't a good enough reason.

Yes, this is true.

> Python is the "official" language of Ubuntu. If we want to merge work
> they're doing (Anthony Towns mentioned their work on boot speed, for
> example) it's a good idea to structure our Python like theirs is. This
> seems to be a good reason to consider python-minimal and some form of
> Python in Essential.

This does not scale.  If each Debian derivative chooses a different
"official language", and we put each of them in Essential, then we end
up with every language in Essential.

Debian already *has* an official language for this purpose: Perl.  If
Ubuntu wants to replace that with Python, it's up to them, but it
seems like a lot of work.

What I hear is *not* that Python is the official language instead of
Perl, but that it is the official language *in addition to* Perl.  So
now, why?  Remember, "I'd like to write scripts in X" is not a good
enough reason, so what is the reason for having two official

Reply to: