>   I suggest that we come up with a PyGnomeHello sample application in
> python, but using autotools, gnome autogen, etc.  A "Best Current
> Practices" program, to serve as example.

That would be wonderful. Could someone do that this week, please?

>  Probably we can come up with a
> document too, explaining how to do python gnome integration.
>
>>
>> I'm not a python coder so feel free to correct me, but I suggest:
>>
>> 1. GNOME Desktop modules should use the #! technique to specify a
>> particular version of python, to avoid breaking the application when a
>> new
>> incompatible version of python is installed. For instance:
>> #!/usr/bin/python-2.3
>
> I think it would be more correct:
>   #! /usr/bin/env python2.3
>
>   An alternative would be to make configure check AM_PATH_PROG
> (python2.3), and sed replace the first line of the program script
> frontend with the correct path.  So if the user installs python 2.3
> in /usr/local, the installed python program packages still
> use /usr/bin/python2.3.
>
>   This sort of decisions should be discussed and standardised.
>
>> Distributers of binary packages must, of course, adjust the prefix in
>> this
>> path if necessary.
>>
>> 2. The GNOME Desktop should use only one major version of python, such
>> as
>> 2.2 or 2.3, but not both. Which version to use, and when to start using
>> a
>> newer one, should be agreed among the maintainers.
>
>   Fine.
>
>>
>> 3. The GNOME Desktop should use only python bindings that are in the
>> GNOME
>> Bindings release, because those bindings offer API stability, and a
>> reliable  release schedule. There might be exceptions to this [1], but
>> this should be avoided for commonly-used bindings, and these extra
>> modules
>> would then need to be approved as part of the GNOME Desktop instead of
>> the
>> GNOME Bindings.
>
>   I hope you mean "The GNOME Desktop should use only python bindings _of
> GNOME libraries_ that are in the GNOME Bindings release".

Yes. But my sentences get long and boring very easily.

>  Because
> applications may wish to use python bindings for external libraries,
> just like GNOME C applications are allowed to use non-GNOME libraries
> too, as long as there is no GNOME library providing similar
> functionality.

Yes, though we often have to say that these are part of the Desktop.

>   Also, I think this places an extra importance on the future inclusion
> of gnome-python in the GNOME Bindings.

Yes, definitely.

>  Therefore, I commit myself to
> propose its inclusion for GNOME 2.10, when the time comes.

Wonderful, and I thank you. That time is now, really. The actual decision
comes later.

Murray Cumming
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
www.murrayc.com
www.openismus.com
_______________________________________________
pygtk mailing list   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.daa.com.au/mailman/listinfo/pygtk
Read the PyGTK FAQ: http://www.async.com.br/faq/pygtk/

Reply via email to