On Tue, 2006-01-10 at 10:40 -0500, Decklin Foster wrote:
> The bindings built from the syck source do not work very well at all.
> There is an alternative binding, with its own source, called PySyck. See
> here:
>
> http://redhanded.hobix.com/inspect/languageHoppingWithYaml.html
> http://trac.xitology.org/pysyck/
>
> I was going to package it myself, but the natural package name would be
> python-syck and it really ought to replace the current bindings, IMHO.
> Since the current package is yours I want to give you the opportunity to
> maintain it first rather than just taking over with a different package
> name. Either way, the syck source package would first need to be
> modified to not build python-syck, so that the pysyck source package
> could.
>
> I'd like to use this stuff soon, so please let me know!
I was about to RFA syck due to time constraints. If you are interested,
you can have syck. Then you can replace the syck bindings with these or
even do two packages. Syck seems to be rather orphaned upstream.
Otherwise I'm happy with dropping the python bindings from the syck
package.
Robert.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
