On Jul 18, 10:25 pm, Chris Carlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > r000n wrote: > > I hope anybody will read this message :) > > As I see, transport development slowed. > > Therefore question to developers: do you planned add new features in > > PyICQt or current mainline policy - bugfixes only? > > Many (if not all) who used to develop pyicq-t and pyaim-t don't even run > the transports anymore, making it really hard to even accept bugfixes. > If someone would like to contribute significant fixes or a significant > amount of new development I'm sure something can be arranged. > > Speaking only for myself, these transports were, at one point, good > enough, which lead to a slowdown in development. The increasing adoption > of pure Jabber then removed a large motivation to run the transports in > the first place. > > Without that itch to scratch there's not much development going on now. > > ~Chris
Ok. I want add some features in PyICQt, but these changes can reduce stability and cause increase memory consumption. I see two ways now: 1. Continue developing (and may be cause of discontent) 2. Make fork (and protect the PyICQt reputation ;)) --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "py-transports" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/py-transports?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
