X-Authentication-Warning: delorie.com: mail set sender to geda-user-bounces using -f
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2015 01:52:04 -0400
Message-Id: <201510070552.t975q4SA027281@envy.delorie.com>
From: DJ Delorie <dj AT delorie DOT com>
To: geda-user AT delorie DOT com
In-reply-to: <alpine.DEB.2.00.1510070712400.7137@igor2priv>
	(gedau AT igor2 DOT repo DOT hu)
Subject: Re: [geda-user] GTK3, Glade interface designer (how to support
 multiple scripting languages without n^2 effort)
References: <20151003210701 DOT de392b925f54dadb0a5fedd8 AT gmail DOT com> <CAC4O8c_g7e562Gaotrbi6gLfjP6cJU1ys=MtEkDE7bSh4F9dfg AT mail DOT gmail DOT com> <1443975731 DOT 671 DOT 52 DOT camel AT ssalewski DOT de> <20151004191717 DOT bf8223417541a9306bfbd9ea AT gmail DOT com>
 <CAC4O8c9Bi5HJfcW6wUgm_+4O2gs4vDdBMbS2hF_0dCqnBuJahQ AT mail DOT gmail DOT com> <1443997480 DOT 2068 DOT 32 DOT camel AT ssalewski DOT de> <CAC4O8c-bnGky=Nab59-pOTJkB8Q9Tc5t5hqE+dnEF-777hUjMg AT mail DOT gmail DOT com> <1444070851 DOT 1014 DOT 20 DOT camel AT ssalewski DOT de> <muv4ua$hat$1 AT ger DOT gmane DOT org>
 <alpine DOT DEB DOT 2 DOT 00 DOT 1510060356440 DOT 7137 AT igor2priv> <56133047 DOT 7030402 AT neurotica DOT com> <alpine DOT DEB DOT 2 DOT 00 DOT 1510060433080 DOT 7137 AT igor2priv> <56133CC4 DOT 7000306 AT neurotica DOT com> <alpine DOT DEB DOT 2 DOT 00 DOT 1510060523170 DOT 7137 AT igor2priv> <56135F05 DOT 9000203 AT neurotica DOT com>
 <CAC4O8c-OZHX2PLEKEW9X1N4BV0xXf_WfH=JkfiEjAXS6eypLsw AT mail DOT gmail DOT com> <CAM2RGhQFe5C+Z4Ko0zLt02xNDEyZUFQBosq6m7b34zwVV-V4Lg AT mail DOT gmail DOT com> <alpine DOT DEB DOT 2 DOT 00 DOT 1510070555020 DOT 7137 AT igor2priv> <201510070458 DOT t974wZu9022589 AT envy DOT delorie DOT com> <alpine DOT DEB DOT 2 DOT 00 DOT 1510070712400 DOT 7137 AT igor2priv>
Reply-To: geda-user AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To: nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List: geda-user AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com
Precedence: bulk


Well, my experience is from Fedora, perhaps it has different rules.

> I see no reason why a distro would package glues of different
> languages into a single big package.

If the concept is "these are pcb's scripting languages" they might
choose to keep them together for convenience, despite the dynamic
loader capabilities.

> do you have anything against it?

I'm not trying to discourage you, just mentioning that my experience
with Fedora leads me to expect an all-or-nothing packaging approach.