Here's my $0.02... how about *1* distribution (a.k.a. "Core") with other
features such as view, DB connectivity, etc. being separately installable
"packages" that are dynamically but explicitly loaded / used by the single
distribution / interpreter to extend functionality? Otherwise, we'll end up
in the unenviable situation of i.e. Tcl circa the early 90s, where every new,
interesting extension essentially required its own version / build of the
interpreter, and the community fragmented...
jb
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > If it's a choice between /Core and /View, then /View wins. But
> > you bring up
> > good points. If /View supplants /Core, changing the name to /Core may be
> > worth RT's time to consider. For the reasons you point out it is in some
> > sense is more "attention getting."
> >
> > --Alan
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >
>
> I could live with, Alan... Just so long as /Core stays lean and mean, the
> more features it has, the better.
>
> --Ralph
