Re: emacs-26 3fc05cf: Scripts to automate windows binary distribution

[Kaushal Modi]

On Wed, Oct 25, 2017, 6:17 AM Michael Albinus <address@hidden> wrote:

If it were me, I would have taken Perl, I don't speak Python. Other
people would prefer Guile.

Before we continue with this, I would like to see a general
agreement. Or at least a go by the maintainers.

(Pls ignore this, if it was discussed and decided already)

The GNU Coding Standards claim:

"The standard extensibility interpreter for GNU software is Guile
(<http://www.gnu.org/software/guile/>), which implements the language
Scheme (an especially clean and simple dialect of Lisp).  [...]  We
don't reject programs written in other "scripting languages" such as
Perl and Python, but using Guile is the path that will lead to overall
consistency of the GNU system."

<https://www.gnu.org/prep/standards/standards.txt>

Just a bystander's observation:

It would be bad if this contribution is reverted *just because* the script is written in Python. I have gone through pain in real world where just because the upper management doesn't like one language, stuff written in that language has to be rewritten in another. In my experience, it's simply a waste of time, demoralizing, and a source for introduction of new bugs. 

While the "introduction of bugs" might not apply to this 1 standalone script, it would be nice if the same bike shedding doesn't happen in the Emacs world too. 

I code in Perl, Python, Bash and other scripts. While I might have a preference to work with one over others, it's best to keep on maintaining the scripts written in their original languages. 

If Phil is actually proficient in Guile too, then may be rewriting that script in Guile makes some sense to support the Gnu Coding standards. But if he is not, then I believe it will be a waste of time and loss of motivation.

--

Kaushal Modi