Hi Timothy, > Thanks for taking a look at this. In light of your response I’m wondering > about > the ob-* inclusion criteria. I recall when removal was being discussed the > concerns being with ob-* libraries that were some combination of: > ⁃ Too niche > ⁃ Being actively maintained
I may be wrong, and perhaps many people are already using svgbob to convert ASCII drawing to SVG, but I think it is too niche for being part of Org core and Emacs core. The questions I'd ask before including a Babel library in Org are*: - Is the language supported in Emacs core? - Is the language or tool widely used? You don't need to score very high with *both* answer, but at least one. For example, ob-js.el qualifies because Javascript is supported in Emacs and widely used. ob-plantuml.el because, even though there is no kind of "Emacs support", the tool is widely used. I don't think svgbob is widely used enough (3K GitHub stars does not say much about the real use). There is no harm in not being included in Org, such useful libraries can live in GNU or NonGNU ELPA and still reach their audience. WDYT? * Given these criteria, I'm inclined to add ob-stan.el to the list of Babel libary that should probably move outside of Org core. -- Bastien
