Re: when and why did python(-minimal) become essential?
On Sun, Jan 29, 2006 at 02:58:05PM +0100, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> 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.
What's this "wouldn't be accepted" nonsense? Are you seriously suggesting
that, if someone rewrote adduser in Python, that it would be rejected by the
ftpmasters *because* it was written in Python?
> 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.
They're refusing it on the principle of "the cost/benefit ratio sucks". Not
a bad principle, as things go. Spend some time enhancing the benefit side
of the equation, and less time screaming that people are meanies, and your
language-of-choice-for-today might just have a hope of making it in.
- Matt
Bannerwaver for "Ruby in Essential" because it'd be cool.
Reply to: