Wheel-reinvention with Python

[Jorge Godoy]

Mike Meyer wrote:

> 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.

Me neither.  You pointed out that having a standard distribution made by
some company would solve the non-standard GUI problem.  I believe we share
the same opinion, judging from this last post of yours.  Maybe I missed
something on your message and read it as if you had a different opinion.
 
>> 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.

What works for you?  You believe that chaos is better than having standards? 
I believe that flexibility is good, but not chaos.
 
> 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

I dunno.  Maybe I confused your words.  I agree on disagreeing ;-)

> 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.

One IDE, you mean?  I believe the freedom to choose from multiple IDEs is
also good.  Some code on VI, others on Emacs, others on Eclipse, others
on ... 

I agree that having multiple toolkits is good.

> BTW, in answer to your rhetorical question about GUI's for Linux, the
> answer is plwm.

:-)

And does it integrate well with common business apps, such as a mail client,
note taking apps, addressbooks (with personal and shared entries), calendar
with ability to share appointments, etc.?


Be seeing you,
-- 
Jorge Godoy      <godoy at ieee.org>