On 2009-11-10, at 22:17, Martin v. Löwis wrote:
> If that imaginary editor has lots of build dependencies that make
> it really difficult to use it, I would be opposed to including it.
> If it requires one library that is typically already available on
> a Linux system, it would be fine with me.
s/
On 2009-11-10, at 22:07, Greg Ewing wrote:
> So, I'd say that, like democracy, [IDLE is] not very good, but
> it's better than any of the alternatives. :-)
Speaking purely as a Python user, I am very happy that IDLE is part of the
Python distribution. Personally, I use and like emacs too much, a