On Thu, 2006-09-14 at 09:06 +0200, Baptiste Mille-Mathias wrote: > > > Ter, 2006-09-12 às 14:26 -0400, Hubert Figuiere escreveu: > > > > Why not? The language and needed dependencies, including runtime, is just > > an other > > parameter of teh software. What'sw wrong with disliking Mono or Python or > > C++? > > > > > > Sander > > > > .sigless > > > > > > Hello > > I think some people forget the main goal of this thread: "should we > include LAT in GNOME for release 2.18 ?" > Before any language debate, we should focus on why LAT should or > shouldn't be included in GNOME. (specially because the language debate > for Mono is over, and I'm not a pro mono guy). > > For me, I would say No, as don't see really a reason to include LAT in > GNOME, because administrating LDAP is not a common task. Even if we > consider the Administrator platform (pessulus, sabayon), these tools > are for administrating GNOME desktop, and not for general > administration. > but a LDAP admin tool serves the purpose of managing users that run the GNOME desktop :-) That is, it will consolidate the admin suite into something that system admins would base their decision on to install GNOME instead of another desktop. -- Rodrigo Moya <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
_______________________________________________ desktop-devel-list mailing list [email protected] http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
