[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> 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...
>
Very valid point imho .....
-pekr-
>
> 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
