Alex Roitman wrote: > On 2003.12.16 17:36, Christian Robottom Reis wrote: > > This could hamper the addition of simple, non-intrusive API that we > > receive in the form of patches to Bugzilla. Yes, many of those have been > > ignored, but I'm trusting Johan will realize he's responsible for taking > > care of shepherding the simpler ones and leaving the hairy stuff for > > James <wink>. > > A little off topic in this thread, but while we're at it: > > Bugzilla's # 122592 has a 30-liner patch for 3 months > now. Is it possible for someone with the power to make > it a gnome.vfs relality?
I've been waiting for about two months for several submitted patches (Bugzilla 126479 and 125172) that would allow the GenericTreeModel to work for more than just trivial cases (proper handling of iters with a value of None). I've been running off a locally patched version of pygtk, but my project can't be distributed using the GenericTreeModel until a pygtk release is made that resolves the issue. Using the TreeModel is just killing performance (minutes to load a large number of items, as opposed to a GenericTreeModel taking under two seconds). I guess I'd like to add my voice to Alex's in asking if there is a way we can get some of these patches into a release (2.0.1?). Don -- Don Allingham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> GRAMPS - Open Source Genealogy _______________________________________________ pygtk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.daa.com.au/mailman/listinfo/pygtk Read the PyGTK FAQ: http://www.async.com.br/faq/pygtk/
