[lsb-discuss] Should language bindings for LSB libs be in LSB?

[Jeff Licquia]

Wichmann, Mats D wrote:
> There are an assortment of language bindings
> available which enable using particular libraries
> in languages in which they are not written.
> 
> Python has bindings for most LSB libraries.
> Perl probably has just as many.
> 
> Some libraries have C++ wrappers -
> glibmm, gtkmm, gdkmm.
> 
> We've touched before, and deferred, the discussion
> of whether these wrappers should be part of LSB.

I'm inclined to take these piecemeal--neither have a rule excluding 
them, nor one requiring them.  Let demand pull them in.

It would seem that C++ bindings would be particularly easy to ship as 
part of the app in question, especially in cases where the bindings 
aren't quite stable yet.  OTOH, we can't allow the shipping of dynamic 
language bindings without specifying the language's C extension 
interface, which is something none of the dynamic languages have been 
keen on us doing.