> I haven't heard from you in a while and was wondering were you were at > in reviewing and/or incorporating the changes I made to Tcl::Tk for > perl/tk compatibility?
Hi, indeed, I was planning with gathering your pieces, but eventually forgot about the problem, sorry. Right now I am in vacation trip till 13th of may w/o Internet. > If you don't think the changes fit your planned direction for the > Tcl::Tk package, I was thinking that another option for the changes is > to be released as a separate package (something like a new Tcl::pTk > package ) > > What do you think? I really like this solution - because it was my blue dream and real preference to have Tcl::Tk module really small - essentially one single PM file. But your solution has an unfortunate problem, though. Having yet another perl+tk solution will make people confused. They will not know what to select between Tkx, perl/Tk, Tcl::Tk and Tcl::pTk. But if users of this mailing list will see this as no-problem, I will greatly support this, and even will help you with some eventual patches of your new module. Sorry me once again, I really appreciate your effort, although I can not show you the code to support this my statement :) Best regards, Vadim.
