From: MonkeeSage <MonkeeSage@...>
Date: 2007-11-28T05:09:59+09:00
Subject: Re: "Why I Program In Ruby (And Maybe Why You Shouldn't)"

On Nov 27, 1:38 pm, Jari Williamsson
<jari.williams...@mailbox.swipnet.se> wrote:
> MonkeeSage wrote:
> > 3.) No clue about QT. (Somebody?)
>
> I believe QT would be a no-no in the default Ruby distribution, due to
> the license agreement.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Jari Williamsson

Trolltech actually have a dial-license (alternate GPLv2) for non-
commerical uses. [1] But I wasn't suggesting proposals for core
library packages (I don't really think that Tk should be in core). I'm
just trying to list the available options for major, cross-platform
toolkits. I believe that ruby as a GUI glue language (it is *much
more* than glue, but it is *at least* glue), shouldn't focus on
distributing GUI toolkits or bindings as part of the standard library;
instead, it should be up to the developer to redistribute or make
accessible those requirements. For example, when an XP user downloads
a .NET2 and and only has .NET1 installed, there is no magical genie
that pops out of the app and says "poof, be installed--you now
have .NET2 *fireworks and party favors*" Instead, they are directed to
windows update to get the required software (or else it's bundled as a
redist and starts a separate install process). I see no reason for
ruby to be different. (Sorry...this is not directed at you at all
Jari, I'm just voicing my stream-of-consciousness. I thank you for
your input!).

[1] http://trolltech.com/products/qt/licenses/licensing/opensource/

Regards,
Jordan