Aaron Rittmaster schrieb: > Excuse me if I'm being overly blunt here, but it is precisely this sort of > "under the hood" holy war that helps prevent the wide adoption of Linux by > practicing lawyers. The bottom line for the users of debian-lex is not what > drives it under the hood. The bottom line is whether the system works and > performs the functions necessary to be an effective tool in the law office. +1 > > The use of computing in a law office is all about data. As long as data can > be relatively easily input and retreived in the formats necessary, lawyers > don't really care what programming tools were used to deal with that data. +1 > Python is a great tool. I'm glad that Jeroen is skilled in the use of Python > and is interested in this project. But if we have interested perl or php > programmers, there's no reason to exclude their input. If software written > in Python, perl, and/or php cannot inter-operate then that is a sign of poor > programming. Again, it's all about the data folks. All three of those > programming tools are capable of handling the same data types. Why would wend > there > choose to exclude from participation in this project developers who's > background and skills in perl and/or php could lead to the development of > useful and effective tools, solely based on the programming language used to > develop the tools? One of the beauties of Linux is its ability to function > well with applications developed using a variety of tools.
and there are more other tools like StarBasic and OpenOffice.org > > IMHO, it betrays the core values of an open-source project when we limit > ourselves to tools developed based on a single variety of source. You limit also the number of person who can be involved Regards Mechtilde -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
