[lsb-discuss] Why python was chosen as a part of LSB?
netkgk at gmail.com
Tue Jun 10 23:31:34 UTC 2014
On Tue, Jun 10, 2014 at 1:43 AM, Jeff Licquia
<licquia at linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> Assuming good faith (which, I'm aware, may be dangerous):
> - Python is popular, especially on Linux; every distro ships with
> Python support.
programing language, if it has some practical use is popular and have
some community, so why chose only one of them?
ever. Besides it is much more readable and faster than python. So why
python? Just because of the fact that some distros like RedHat and
Gentoo was so stupid to chose python as programming language for their
packaging systems? Why not use Suse experience, then? Is it worst, or
> - Python is fairly well standardized; within each Python major version,
> scripts generally just work with newer versions, and regressions are
> treated as bugs.
Really? Why any Desktop installation requires at least two versions of
python, then? May be it is not so compatible in the first place? I
cannot see why keeping two versions of python is better compare to
keeping two versions of ruby, for example. I did not even mention
standardization do we need?
> - Python upstream contributed to its inclusion.
too, only if they were asked to. I did not managed to google messages
like this one https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2006-November/070027.html
that was send to the ruby-dev mail-list.
> I note that nothing in your missive gives me any reason to believe that
> this was the wrong decision. Indeed, it's remarkably evidence-free.
What kind of evidence do you need, except sane reason? You did not
provide any evidence oppose either.
> At the risk of prolonging a useless conversation, might I ask what your
> goal was in making these comments?
LSB have a power to convince people to use one technology or another,
and this power must be used wisely. Until then, we will still be
reading "motivations" like this one
More information about the lsb-discuss