On Wed, 2003-12-10 at 12:19, Jonathan Merritt wrote: > Hi, > > I'm probably being thick here, but I would assume that all of us pygtk > and pygnome users would want the Python bindings included in this effort > as soon as possible, since it looks like the objective here is a better > union between different language bindings and the core GTK and GNOME > libraries. > > I'm wondering if I'm missing something because there seems to be > remarkably little response to this. At face value, it seems to me to be > a Really Good Thing (TM).
Read the full thread that starts here: http://mail.gnome.org/archives/language-bindings/2003-November/msg00001.html (it continues a bit in the December archives as well). The language bindings proposal contains some moderately arbitrary rules and doing things in one particular way that doesn't necessarily accomodate all languages nicely. As a result, there are still some things to work out from the Python side. My concern is that languages not signing onto this proposal end up looking second-class (which would be a tragedy in the Python case. At this point the GNOME Python bindings are some of the best non-C bindings around in many areas). But making things harder for somebody like James H. is not productive either. I haven't really formed much of an opinion beyond this -- I like the idea, I'm not mad keen on the current implementation and now that it has been announced, it may be more difficult to change. Malcolm _______________________________________________ pygtk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.daa.com.au/mailman/listinfo/pygtk Read the PyGTK FAQ: http://www.async.com.br/faq/pygtk/
