On 2017-02-16 07:33 AM, Thomas Martitz wrote:
Am 16.02.2017 um 15:55 schrieb Matthew Brush:
On 2017-02-16 03:15 AM, Thomas Martitz wrote:
Am 16.02.2017 um 11:58 schrieb Vasiliy Faronov:
Jiří, Matthew, thanks!
I missed the GKeyFile thing.
Actually, my plugin is written in Python (via Geanypy), and doesn't
get the GKeyFile on project-open/project-save. Probably because there
are no Python bindings for it.
But I guess Python's built-in ConfigParser should be enough.
Geanypy is not actively developed at this time. Let me suggest to give
What does that mean? It's not 100% perfect, but it does what it's
intended to do quite well. Should we just start committing random
changes so it's "actively developed"?
It's not being updated for new Geany APIs, nor does the upstream
developer (you :-) review PRs in a timely manner, for a start.
In this particular case, I don't think PyGtk has bindings for GKeyFile
(since ConfigParser was effectively the same), so there's not much point
in GeanyPy just passing a naked C pointer into Python which can't be
manipulated in any meaningful way.
As for new APIs, "the" upstream developer, and making it sound like a
dead project; everyone who wants to contribute is more than welcome.
There are 5 "collaborators" with push access on the Github repo
(including you) and I'd gladly add anyone else who is interested in
contributing. Just because I choose not to spend a lot of time hacking
on something that works well enough for me, doesn't mean it has stop
anyone else from making it better for them.
Regards,
Matthew Brush
_______________________________________________
Devel mailing list
Devel@lists.geany.org
https://lists.geany.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devel
