[Asterisk-Dev] Dev call 1.2 release discussion

[Steven]

On Mon, 2005-05-09 at 00:24 -0400, Travis wrote:
> I do commend you for being selective of which packages to install, but
> I was referring to availability to install python.  On all
> distributions that I am aware of (which would encompass the ones the
> vast majority that people would be installing on), python is readily
> available.  There is no hindrance.

While I think those who install asterisk on the linksys routers are a
little odd, but I'm pretty sure that python isn't available there. Of
course I'm pretty sure they aren't compiling on the linksys so it isn't
as big of an issue. 

If just availability of a language is important, we could always get an
app written in perl, ruby, lisp, chicken, ook, brainfuck, or any parrot
supported language shortly. As you can see, availability is not enough
of a yard stick.

> So many people say they do not want to tie down asterisk with
> dependencies.  I admire this: I do believe it is an excellent virtue
> to hold.  However, installing python is not a critical process.  I am
> not a big hot shot in python.  I do however completely see the power
> of its abilities.

Maybe you should follow the rants about coding style. Since python is a
language that white space is important, maybe we need to not go that
route. Also, why should you force yet another scripting language on a
group a people who are here because of their C coding skills?

We could build the installer in C since we have the C skill here. Of
course if we generalize it so it could be used elsewhere, we would
probably end up reinventing make or autoconf. Hmm, why not just use the
tools we already have.

I have downloaded several tarballs where the developers use autoconf,
but they distribute it after configure produced the Makefile. This
reduces the needs on the users while keeping the developers in nicer
tools.

> I would like to point to an article that a friend has shown me.
> http://www.linuxjournal.com/node/3882/print  written by ESR.

So another "important" person says they like the language. Everyone has
a preferred language. It doesn't make it any more valid a reason to tie
asterisk to it.

> This is not a rant, though I apologize for length.  The reason why I
> continue to push this idea is that I believe that all arguments
> against Scons (and python) that I have seen thus far to be weak.  I am
> looking for the victory of asterisk, not of what I argument I make.  I
> only hope that you will all look at it seriously and stop contending
> fault in Scons because of the installation of a package, that is
> supplied by the distributions, as a damning effacement.

It is a requirement on the core that isn't necessary. That is all that
matters. Just think, there are RPMs and DEBs, and even debian is
providing asterisk as a package on it's own. Why worry about a installer
in this forum when it is built into the distro specific packages. 

Anyways, just my few thoughts.
-- 
Steven <critch at basesys.com>