[ANN] 2018 Call for Grant Proposals


(Shugo Maeda) #1

The Ruby Association is looking to give grants for development
projects related to Ruby implementations, libraries and frameworks, including
projects that improve existing software.

If you have a good idea, please submit a proposal. However, please
note that we do not intend to fund development projects of Ruby
applications for specific purposes because the aim of this grant is to
improve Ruby and its environment.

See the following site for details:

https://www.ruby.or.jp/en/news/20180801


(Nicola Mingotti) #2

I know i probably should not replay but, I guess i must rise
here a problem that has to be fixed. In the hope one or more
programmer, with time and skills, will accept the challenge
and hopefully enjoy the Ruby Association grant.

*** Ruby needs a simple _working_ GUI toolkit ***

It would be an very important to fix the gem "tk"
to work with latest stable realease of Tk, the only thing working
for me is compiling with Tk8.5 wich is the old stable.
[ https://www.tcl.tk/software/tcltk/choose.html ]

If it is necessary to break retro compatibility with previus rubytk code, please do it,
call the gem e.g. "tk86" and that's it. Who needs retro compatility
will have the burden to install old Tk libraries.

I don't use Rails, for me Ruby is a general purpose scripting language.
As such it needs a GUI.

bye
nicola

···

On 08/02/18 03:31, Shugo Maeda wrote:

The Ruby Association is looking to give grants for development
projects related to Ruby implementations, libraries and frameworks, including
projects that improve existing software.

If you have a good idea, please submit a proposal. However, please
note that we do not intend to fund development projects of Ruby
applications for specific purposes because the aim of this grant is to
improve Ruby and its environment.

See the following site for details:

https://www.ruby.or.jp/en/news/20180801

Unsubscribe: <mailto:ruby-talk-request@ruby-lang.org?subject=unsubscribe>
<http://lists.ruby-lang.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/ruby-talk>

--
--------------------------
Dr. Nicola Mingotti
R&D - Borghi Srl
CTO - BondInsider
--------------------------


(Marvin Gülker) #3

*** Ruby needs a simple _working_ GUI toolkit ***

There's Shoes, in various variants, isn't it? Then, the Gtk+ bindings
for Ruby are well maintained and I've in the past had good success with
them (despite the project name ruby-gnome2 they provide up-to-date Gtk+3
bindings).

If you feel like fiddling, a friend of mine once started and then
abandoned bindings to wxWidgets, rwx
<https://github.com/Hanmac/rwx>. They might provide a starting point if
someone wants to create something new.

It would be an very important to fix the gem "tk"
to work with latest stable realease of Tk, the only thing working
for me is compiling with Tk8.5 wich is the old stable.
[ https://www.tcl.tk/software/tcltk/choose.html ]

Specifically related to Tk, you're too late to the party. Tk once was
part of Ruby's stdlib, but the maintainer gave up on it because of
hostile messages he received about it. Search this mailinglist's archive
for more information. I very much regret that Tk was removed from the
stdlib, but maybe, just maybe, if a maintainer steps up re-adding it to
the stdlib could be re-considered.

Marvin

···

Am 03. August 2018 um 09:33 Uhr +0200 schrieb Nicola Mingotti:

--
Blog: https://mg.guelker.eu
PGP/GPG ID: F1D8799FBCC8BC4F


(Andy Jones) #4

Shoes doesn't really count -- it's a framework that uses Ruby, rather than a library that you can use _in_ Ruby.

And I think the use cases for Tk and Gtk are quite different. Tk, like shoes, lets you do something simple very quickly.

So I'd also welcome the return of Tk (although I don't much care if it's in Stdlib).

Click here to view Company Information and Confidentiality Notice.<http://www.jameshall.co.uk/index.php/small-print/email-disclaimer>

Please note that we have updated our privacy policy in line with new data protection regulations. Please refer to our website to view the ways in which we handle your data.


(Leam Hall) #5

I've felt some of the same hostility. Sometimes it seems like "Matz is nice so we can be jerks." Maybe I'm overly sensitive, but some attitudes in the community have pushed me away from Ruby more than once. I dread asking questions on IRC; either nothings happens or someone tells me I should upgrade. The other day it was just "cut and paste the code to the new class".

On the other hand there are folks like Andy here and baweaver on IRC that are very knowledgeable and helpful. One of my personal goals is to remain encouraging as I learn enough to be helpful.

Leam

···

On 08/03/2018 07:05 AM, Marvin Gülker wrote:

Specifically related to Tk, you're too late to the party. Tk once was
part of Ruby's stdlib, but the maintainer gave up on it because of
hostile messages he received about it.

Marvin


(Carlo E. Prelz) #6

Quoting Andy Jones (Andy.Jones@jameshall.co.uk):

And I think the use cases for Tk and Gtk are quite different. Tk,
like shoes, lets you do something simple very quickly.

I'd like to encourage people to give a try at using Gtk in Ruby. It is
VASTLY easier to write a fully operative Gtk2/3 app in Ruby than in
C. It requires getting a bit used to it but then, a simple howto
process may be as small as this:

--8<----8<----8<----8<----8<----8<----8<----8<----8<----8<----8<----8<--

require('gtk3')

btn=Gtk::Button.new(:label=>"Ciao")
btn.signal_connect("clicked") do
  puts("Ciao!") # any code that you want to execute when the button is pressed
end

w=Gtk::Window.new("Test")
w.signal_connect("destroy") do
  Gtk::main_quit
end
w.border_width=40
w.set_size_request(200,100)
w.add(btn)
w.show_all

Gtk::main

--8<----8<----8<----8<----8<----8<----8<----8<----8<----8<----8<----8<--

I was also pleasantly surprised at witnessing how easily the whole
gtk3 was successfully brought in with a few gems (that is with a
recent Ruby and on Linux).

I had to write a couple of largish user-interface programs in the past
years in Ruby/Gtk. I must say that, once I entered into the paradigm,
the result was quite satisfactory.

My only pet peeve is that the port to mruby is old and outdated (and
pretends to use ffi...). The next time that I have a few dozens of
years free, I will do a new port :wink:

My heartfelt thanks to Kou and the team who maintains Gtk for Ruby.

Carlo

···

Subject: RE: [ANN] 2018 Call for Grant Proposals
  Date: ven 03 ago 18 11:16:30 +0000

--
  * Se la Strada e la sua Virtu' non fossero state messe da parte,
* K * Carlo E. Prelz - fluido@fluido.as che bisogno ci sarebbe
  * di parlare tanto di amore e di rettitudine? (Chuang-Tzu)


(Andy Jones) #7

I gather the equivalent in Ruby/TK is something like

--8<----8<----8<----8<----8<----8<----8<----8<----8<----8<----8<----8<--

    require "tk"

    root = TkRoot.new { title "Test" }

    button = TkButton.new(buttonFrame) do
        text "Ciao"
        command proc {exit}
   end

   Tk.mainloop

--8<----8<----8<----8<----8<----8<----8<----8<----8<----8<----8<----8<--

Click here to view Company Information and Confidentiality Notice.<http://www.jameshall.co.uk/index.php/small-print/email-disclaimer>

Please note that we have updated our privacy policy in line with new data protection regulations. Please refer to our website to view the ways in which we handle your data.


(Nicola Mingotti) #8

It is one hour i am tring to write this message, i will cut it short.

MANTRA: *** Ruby Needs a Gui ****

-] There are many toolkits, If Tk is sobstituted by another for me it is no prblem
but, Tk has the following pros:
1] Very easy
2] Well documented
2.1] Cross Platform
3] Stable in years, It is more than 20 years that, to write simple
interfaces, I write the same mambo-jumbo Tk adapted to language: Python,Perl,Common-Lisp,Tcl.
4] Tk is packaged into Python, the dominant scripting language, so
more potential users could come and try Ruby with immediate satisfaction.
5] Tk resisted in Python for last 2 decaeds, it will mean something !
They changed "print" to "print()" but Tk is still there.

-] It is not more than 1.5 years I stared to use Ruby so I was not here when
it was decided to expunge Tk from Ruby and make it a gem.
In my opionion that was a *mistake*.
1] programs written for non-programmers require a GUI
2] if you are using a scripting language it means you want to save coding time and possibly
avoid libraries and compilation issues.
=> Putting Tk into a Gem was not a good idea because it requires extra libraries
which Average Joe is not able to set up. Installing the gem requires extra parameters,
with are not immediate to discover.
==> You, the programmer, must fix the stuff in their computer which is extremely annoying.

-] I read around that there were issues in adapting Tk8.6 to Ruby becasue
of the new features introduced.
==> Ok, this is a good reason to give a grant to a motivated programmer how can fix the thing.
If Python can do it, Ruby also can.

···

--
--------------------------
Dr. Nicola Mingotti
R&D - Borghi Srl
CTO - BondInsider
--------------------------


(Leam Hall) #9

MANTRA: *** Ruby Needs a Gui ****

Agreed!

=> Putting Tk into a Gem was not a good idea because it requires extra libraries which Average Joe is not able to set up. Installing the gem requires extra parameters, with are not immediate to discover.

ciao Nicola!

If I understand the background on Ruby, there is movement to turn more
of the Standard Library into gems. The idea is that the gem can
progress at a different pace than the Ruby version. I do not know if
that is good or bad, but people whose opinions I respect seem to like
the idea.

Leam

···

On Fri, Aug 3, 2018 at 10:46 AM, Nicola Mingotti <nmingotti@gmail.com> wrote:


(Fabian Zitter) #10

It is a good idea, at least if the Ruby community keeps growing / does not fall under a certain threshold.
Right now, some features are held back by the democratic process. Some people like the idea, others don’t... Instead of making an absolute decision, Ruby chooses to give the power to developers. That way the standard library can focus on core features, while more specialized libraries can be opinionated (rails), based on C extensions (nokogiri), or use pure Ruby with all the pros and cons...

···

Sent from my iPhone

On Aug 3, 2018, at 23:54, leam hall <leamhall@gmail.com> wrote:

On Fri, Aug 3, 2018 at 10:46 AM, Nicola Mingotti <nmingotti@gmail.com> wrote:

MANTRA: *** Ruby Needs a Gui ****

Agreed!

=> Putting Tk into a Gem was not a good idea because it requires extra libraries which Average Joe is not able to set up. Installing the gem requires extra parameters, with are not immediate to discover.

ciao Nicola!

If I understand the background on Ruby, there is movement to turn more
of the Standard Library into gems. The idea is that the gem can
progress at a different pace than the Ruby version. I do not know if
that is good or bad, but people whose opinions I respect seem to like
the idea.

Leam

Unsubscribe: <mailto:ruby-talk-request@ruby-lang.org?subject=unsubscribe>
<http://lists.ruby-lang.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/ruby-talk>


(Nicola Mingotti) #11

ciao Lem !

In general I support the idea of moving non fundamental stuff out "base Ruby"
and into gems.

On the other side, to use the Python lingo, the kind and amount of batteries
you include into the base system defines what the tool is intended to do.
Or at least, what the tool makes easy to achieve.

In my personal opinion the GUI is so fundamental for a scripting language
that it is necessary to include it in the base system. As a gem, there is the
risk it will be left behind, like it is actually. This must not happen.

Every single pice of code that is directed to non-programmers must have a GUI.
I guess 80% of Mac Users do not even know how to start the terminal, and 85%
of Windows users as well.

If we do not make trivial to run a GUI in Ruby it is like saying that, ok, Ruby is
not intended for end user applications. Only for web stuff, for servers,
or for doployment by programmers and computer enhusiasts of all kind.

bye
Nicola

···

On 08/03/18 16:54, leam hall wrote:

ciao Nicola!

If I understand the background on Ruby, there is movement to turn more
of the Standard Library into gems. The idea is that the gem can
progress at a different pace than the Ruby version. I do not know if
that is good or bad, but people whose opinions I respect seem to like
the idea.

--
--------------------------
Dr. Nicola Mingotti
R&D - Borghi Srl
CTO - BondInsider
--------------------------


(Varro) #12

Shoes doesn't really count -- it's a framework that uses Ruby, rather than a library that you can use _in_ Ruby.

And I think the use cases for Tk and Gtk are quite different. Tk, like shoes, lets you do something simple very quickly.

I disagree. One *could* use Tk for quite complex applications - if in
fact it were maintained, which apparently it is not. Shoes may be
good for getting simple applications up quickly, but doesn't seem to
be suited to serious use.

So I'd also welcome the return of Tk (although I don't much care if it's in Stdlib).

I would too. Too bad the decision to take it out of core has resulted in
its being effectively abandoned.

···

On Friday, 3 Aug 2018 7:16 AM -0400, Andy Jones wrote:

--
Will


(Varro) #13

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--===============1005528524==
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="------------32FDFC27CB24A601BEEE02CF"
Content-Language: en-US

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------32FDFC27CB24A601BEEE02CF
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

It is one hour i am tring to write this message, i will cut it short.

MANTRA: *** Ruby Needs a Gui ****

-] There are many toolkits, If Tk is sobstituted by another for me it is
no prblem
but, Tk has the following pros:
1] Very easy
2] Well documented
2.1] Cross Platform
3] Stable in years, It is more than 20 years that, to write simple
interfaces, I write the same mambo-jumbo Tk adapted to language:
Python,Perl,Common-Lisp,Tcl.
4] Tk is packaged into Python, the dominant scripting language, so
more potential users could come and try Ruby with immediate satisfaction.
5] Tk resisted in Python for last 2 decaeds, it will mean something !
They changed "print" to "print()" but Tk is still there.

-] It is not more than 1.5 years I stared to use Ruby so I was not here when
it was decided to expunge Tk from Ruby and make it a gem.
In my opionion that was a *mistake*.

Tk *used* to be standard with Ruby, but the decision to remove it from
the core package and make it a gem has in fact been disastrous!
Please correct me if I'm wrong, but Tk simply doesn't build with
non-obsolete versions of Tk (meaning, Tk8.6).

So, what used to be the *standard* GUI for Ruby apparently has been
completely abandoned!

1] programs written for non-programmers require a GUI
2] if you are using a scripting language it means you want to save
coding time and possibly
avoid libraries and compilation issues.
=> Putting Tk into a Gem was not a good idea because it requires extra
libraries
which Average Joe is not able to set up. Installing the gem requires
extra parameters,
with are not immediate to discover.
==> You, the programmer, must fix the stuff in their computer which is
extremely annoying.

-] I read around that there were issues in adapting Tk8.6 to Ruby becasue
of the new features introduced.
==> Ok, this is a good reason to give a grant to a motivated programmer
how can fix the thing.
If Python can do it, Ruby also can.

Presumably. But it hasn't been done so far.

···

On Friday, 3 Aug 2018 10:46 AM -0400, Nicola Mingotti wrote:

--
Will


(Varro) #14

Simple how-to's are fine, but try to build *any* kind sophisticated
GUI application using Ruby/Gtk, and one is sure to come accross one
*serious* obstacle - Ruby/Gtk documentation is so poor as to be
completely useless! Good luck in making anything more than a trivial
application.

···

On Friday, 3 Aug 2018 7:41 AM -0400, Carlo E. Prelz wrote:

  Subject: RE: [ANN] 2018 Call for Grant Proposals
  Date: ven 03 ago 18 11:16:30 +0000

Quoting Andy Jones (Andy.Jones@jameshall.co.uk):

And I think the use cases for Tk and Gtk are quite different. Tk,
like shoes, lets you do something simple very quickly.

I'd like to encourage people to give a try at using Gtk in Ruby. It is
VASTLY easier to write a fully operative Gtk2/3 app in Ruby than in
C. It requires getting a bit used to it but then, a simple howto
process may be as small as this:

--8<----8<----8<----8<----8<----8<----8<----8<----8<----8<----8<----8<--

require('gtk3')

btn=Gtk::Button.new(:label=>"Ciao")
btn.signal_connect("clicked") do
  puts("Ciao!") # any code that you want to execute when the button is pressed
end

w=Gtk::Window.new("Test")
w.signal_connect("destroy") do
  Gtk::main_quit
end
w.border_width=40
w.set_size_request(200,100)
w.add(btn)
w.show_all

Gtk::main

--8<----8<----8<----8<----8<----8<----8<----8<----8<----8<----8<----8<--

I was also pleasantly surprised at witnessing how easily the whole
gtk3 was successfully brought in with a few gems (that is with a
recent Ruby and on Linux).

I had to write a couple of largish user-interface programs in the past
years in Ruby/Gtk. I must say that, once I entered into the paradigm,
the result was quite satisfactory.

My only pet peeve is that the port to mruby is old and outdated (and
pretends to use ffi...). The next time that I have a few dozens of
years free, I will do a new port :wink:

My heartfelt thanks to Kou and the team who maintains Gtk for Ruby.

--
Will


(Varro) #15

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--===============0632053842==
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="------------44F55FCF0CD8C94D9CC5933F"
Content-Language: en-US

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------44F55FCF0CD8C94D9CC5933F
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

ciao Lem !

In general I support the idea of moving non fundamental stuff out "base
Ruby"
and into gems.

On the other side, to use the Python lingo, the kind and amount of batteries
you include into the base system defines what the tool is intended to do.
Or at least, what the tool makes easy to achieve.

In my personal opinion the GUI is so fundamental for a scripting language
that it is necessary to include it in the base system. As a gem, there
is the
risk it will be left behind, like it is actually. This must not happen.

That is (IMO) *exactly* what has happend to Tk.

Every single pice of code that is directed to non-programmers must have
a GUI.
I guess 80% of Mac Users do not even know how to start the terminal, and 85%
of Windows users as well.

If we do not make trivial to run a GUI in Ruby it is like saying that,
ok, Ruby is
not intended for end user applications. Only for web stuff, for servers,
or for doployment by programmers and computer enhusiasts of all kind.

I couldn't agree more.

···

On Friday, 3 Aug 2018 12:42 PM -0400, Nicola Mingotti wrote:

--
Will


(Don Wilde) #16

If Tk is now applied to Python, will that not mean a resurrection?

I heartily agree with the lack of GUI support, but that seems to be
scripting-language-wide, not just Ruby.

I mourn the loss of wX, but it seems truly dead. IMHO, that leaves FOX
Toolkit and Qt. In my C++ work, my opinion is that QT is a fat,
ostentatious payware wannabe, but FOX has real possibilities. It also
appears that FXruby is getting at least minimal updates as of earlier
this year.

What do people think? Has anyone besides me used these heavier-weight
GUIs? I thought FX was elegant even if it didn't have dials and
spinners. I've used wX and FOX in Ruby, and Qt with C++, and Tk with
Perl and Ruby.

I agree that Shoes, while fun, is not deep enough for real work.

···

On 8/5/18, Will Parsons <varro@nodomain.invalid> wrote:

On Friday, 3 Aug 2018 7:16 AM -0400, Andy Jones wrote:

Shoes doesn't really count -- it's a framework that uses Ruby, rather than
a library that you can use _in_ Ruby.

And I think the use cases for Tk and Gtk are quite different. Tk, like
shoes, lets you do something simple very quickly.

I disagree. One *could* use Tk for quite complex applications - if in
fact it were maintained, which apparently it is not. Shoes may be
good for getting simple applications up quickly, but doesn't seem to
be suited to serious use.

So I'd also welcome the return of Tk (although I don't much care if it's
in Stdlib).

I would too. Too bad the decision to take it out of core has resulted in
its being effectively abandoned.

--
Will

Unsubscribe: <mailto:ruby-talk-request@ruby-lang.org?subject=unsubscribe>
<http://lists.ruby-lang.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/ruby-talk>

--
Don Wilde

"Social programming generates beliefs, beliefs create attitudes,
attitudes cause feelings, feelings cause us to act, and actions
produce results -- good or bad." -- adapted from "What to Say When You
Talk to Yourself," by Shad Helmstetter, Ph. D.


(Carlo E. Prelz) #17

Quoting Will Parsons (varro@nodomain.invalid):

Simple how-to's are fine, but try to build *any* kind sophisticated
GUI application using Ruby/Gtk, and one is sure to come accross one
*serious* obstacle - Ruby/Gtk documentation is so poor as to be
completely useless! Good luck in making anything more than a trivial
application.

I have done that. As I already mentioned, it's been hard. But
obstacles can be solved. At least they have been, in the case of my
few applications (one quite large, the others smaller but requiring
live, non-sluggish interactive bitmap manipulations).

The documentation may be poor, but it is certainly not useless. Then,
I must say that I did my work before the 'introspection' stuff came
to be, so my best documentation was the source. Now, I may have more
problems. But still, everything has to be learned.

Anyway, Gtk was the only working option. I never liked the looks of Tk
(although people were able to do wonders with it - I think of
PureData). Same goes with Qt, that reeks of c++ from miles away. I
don't know if you ever had the joy of compiling Qt.

If I were the Ruby god, I'd start from scratch, doing a nice, tight
rendering engine in C that does not pretend to be directly usable from
applications, and an elegant, clean Ruby interface that exploits the
power of object orientation. And, of course, without the dependance
from hundreds of gems. But, having seen the complexity of Gtk, having
negotiated the use of every aspect I needed with much sweat, I know
that it would be years of effort before you'd obtain the complete
palette of necessary widgets.

If I did not have a job, and if someone offered to pay me for my
needs, that's one think I'd like to dedicate my time to for a few
years...

Carlo

···

Subject: Re: [ANN] 2018 Call for Grant Proposals
  Date: dom 05 ago 18 10:52:54 -0400

--
  * Se la Strada e la sua Virtu' non fossero state messe da parte,
* K * Carlo E. Prelz - fluido@fluido.as che bisogno ci sarebbe
  * di parlare tanto di amore e di rettitudine? (Chuang-Tzu)


(Marvin Gülker) #18

I see a lot of lamenting in this thread. If all of you who complain on
this mailing list about ruby-tk not being maintained would form a group
and dedicate your time to fixing ruby-tk instead of writing to this
mailing list about it, I'm sure that ruby-tk would be quickly back at
live again.

Stop complaining and start acting. That's the best way to change things.
Otherwise, deal with the existing, maintained options (i.e. Gtk+ or
Fox).

Marvin

···

Am 05. August 2018 um 22:46 Uhr -0400 schrieb Will Parsons:

So, what used to be the *standard* GUI for Ruby apparently has been
completely abandoned!

--
Blog: https://mg.guelker.eu
PGP/GPG ID: F1D8799FBCC8BC4F


(Don Wilde) #19

Good point. The problem is not the GTK documentation, it's the
Ruby/GTK docs. I agree that if you're not hip to C the jump may seem
difficult.

Tk is old and moth-eaten. Time to move on. GTK is a Gnome project and
not likely to go away. The only downside is that it doesn't help with
Windows. That was what was so awesome about wXWidgets.

I'm up to my gills now but it seems that the thing to do is to start a
little Facebook group and assemble a team to learn Ruby/GTK and
document the heck out of it.

There is no question in my mind that C++ "smells" a lot worse than
Ruby but that's why Ruby/GTK documented would be so useful. I haven't
used it myself for anything but toys, but putting together an e-book
like FXruby would be a huge step forward for our favorite language.!

···

On 8/6/18, Marvin Gülker <m-guelker@phoenixmail.de> wrote:

Am 05. August 2018 um 22:46 Uhr -0400 schrieb Will Parsons:

So, what used to be the *standard* GUI for Ruby apparently has been
completely abandoned!

I see a lot of lamenting in this thread. If all of you who complain on
this mailing list about ruby-tk not being maintained would form a group
and dedicate your time to fixing ruby-tk instead of writing to this
mailing list about it, I'm sure that ruby-tk would be quickly back at
live again.

--
Don Wilde

"Social programming generates beliefs, beliefs create attitudes,
attitudes cause feelings, feelings cause us to act, and actions
produce results -- good or bad." -- adapted from "What to Say When You
Talk to Yourself," by Shad Helmstetter, Ph. D.


(Nicola Mingotti) #20

With all respect Marvin, I fully disagree.

What I am supporting here is exactly the opposite of what
you propose: "A lone wolf(s) hack to fix the tk gem".

-] I wish Tk would not be a gem, because, as experience proves,
it is left behind => Ruby does not have a default GUI => this is a big problem.

-] I wish a grant would be established to fund sombedoby,
to put Tk back into base Ruby. In such a way you would be *sure*
the GUI is *always* there, as "puts", ready for you to use.

-] The discussion about which GUI framework to adopt it is not central in my
perspective, I will not enter into it. But, i reccomend "Tk" because it is,
1] well documented
1.2] *cross platform*
2] known to many many people
3] stable
4] mature
5] still improved today aka not dead.
6] tons of examples on StackExchenge, (in Python mostly)
7] If we do not have human resources to keep Tk updated then looking
at something more large/complex, or less known, or less mature, is an hopeless
effort and we would rool back here talking Ruby not having a GUI in the next 5 years.
8] Very liberal license: https://www.tcl.tk/software/tcltk/license.html
9] It is more or less the GUI all scripting and non scripting languages support, I am
sure of: Python, Perl, Common Lisp, R, Node, (of course Tcl).

*] A sad consideration. I am closing a nice script i wrote in the last day to
speed-up office phone calls. After a phase of test i must perform, I guess the soft could be useful also to
at least other 4-5 people in our office. But the problem is, I am developing the
stuff in FreeBSD, the other employees use Windows and Mac. Paradoxically, absurdely i would say,
it seems to me that the path of least offort to make the program run on all office platforms
is to rewrite it in Python !

goodbye
Nicola

···

On 08/06/18 12:59, Marvin Gülker wrote:

I see a lot of lamenting in this thread. If all of you who complain on
this mailing list about ruby-tk not being maintained would form a group
and dedicate your time to fixing ruby-tk instead of writing to this
mailing list about it, I'm sure that ruby-tk would be quickly back at
live again.

Stop complaining and start acting. That's the best way to change things.
Otherwise, deal with the existing, maintained options (i.e. Gtk+ or
Fox).

Marvin

--
--------------------------
Dr. Nicola Mingotti
R&D - Borghi Srl
CTO - BondInsider
--------------------------