Re: when and why did python(-minimal) become essential?
On Sun, 29 Jan 2006 14:58:05 +0100, Josselin Mouette <email@example.com> said:
> Le samedi 28 janvier 2006 à 20:42 -0800, Russ Allbery a écrit :
>> Which scripts written in Python do you feel should be included in
>> the base system and cannot be currently because Python isn't
>> included? Be specific.
>> A killer application that everyone wants to have in base will be
>> the way that Python would enter base; without that, I think this
>> discussion is largely a waste of time and an invitation to back
>> into argumentative corners that can only result in hurt feelings.
> There have already been - admittedly sporadic - proposals to rewrite
> some key parts of the system, like the init scripts or adduser, in
> python. However, if the proponent knows from the beginning the
> implementation wouldn't be accepted because of the language it is
> written in, you can't expect him to start working on it.
Unless there is a technical rationale for writing things in a
new language (no, I'm too lazy to learn the old one is not good
enough), this is not a bad thing.
> Putting python in the set of required packages today would simply be
> a waste of resources. But accepting the idea of putting it in *if* a
> good enough application shows up is the necessary step to have the
> applications show up. Some people here are refusing it by principle.
The probability of such a package coming up which would make
the cost benefit analysis worth it is pretty low. In my opinion, of
"Everyone's head is a cheap movie show." Jeff G. Bone
Manoj Srivastava <firstname.lastname@example.org> <http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/>
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C