Le samedi 28 janvier 2006 à 12:47 +0100, Wouter Verhelst a écrit : > > However we have to accept the use of python in more base and required > > packages. This brings python in as a dependency, that's all. But it > > has the same consequences as making it essential. If, as it has > > already been suggested, software like init or adduser was replaced by > > python implementations, would they be rejected? > > Yes, because python is not Essential.
Oh, so you would reject packages depending on libc6, too? > Personally, I'd prefer to throw out perl rather than to add python. Our > set of Essential packages is bloated already as it is. Feel free to rewrite the perl parts of all essential packages in C. I think it would be a great improvement nevertheless. > There is a difference between "COBOL on VMS" and "Python vs Ruby". > Indeed, there is a very strong following of people programming in > Python; but the same is true for Ruby. So why add Python and not Ruby? Because python and ruby have similar features, and the former is more widely spread and used. -- .''`. Josselin Mouette /\./\ : :' : [EMAIL PROTECTED] `. `' [EMAIL PROTECTED] `- Debian GNU/Linux -- The power of freedom
signature.asc
Description: Ceci est une partie de message numériquement signée
