Jorge Godoy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Mike Meyer wrote:
>
>> We already have multiple distributions of Python: CPython, IronPython,
>> and Jython (and there's at least one more). We even have multiple
>> distributions of CPython, what with Active State doing their own and
>> the MacPython distribution. I'm not proposing a fundamental change in
>> the world, I'm suggesting an addition that would satisify the OPs
>> needs.
>> The "standard" distributor is whichever one your organization settles
>> on when it comes time to choose a Python distribution.
> So we don't solve the problem with a "standard" distribution and that was
> the point I was trying to show.
Exactly what problem are you trying to solve? If it's the one about
not having a standard GUI, I don't think it's a problem.
> In fact this sounds more like a joke I've heard a while ago: standards, if
> you don't like the ones out there, create your own.
Works for me.
>> None of which has stopped linux from following this path.
>
> And solve a completely different problem while sharing the very same problem
> you, on the post prior to mine, was trying to solve: what is the standard
> GUI on a Linux distribution? QVWM? WindowMaker? Gnome? KDE? FVWM?
I think you have me confused with someone else. I was responding to
someone who was claiming that the lack of a standard enterprise
strength GUI toolkit was a serious problem for Python - I disagree. I
won't recap the thread, but other languages have been *very*
successful without having a GUI as part of the language, all they had
was one development environment distributed with a GUI.
BTW, in answer to your rhetorical question about GUI's for Linux, the
answer is plwm.
<mike
--
Mike Meyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://www.mired.org/home/mwm/
Independent WWW/Perforce/FreeBSD/Unix consultant, email for more information.
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
