On Sat, Aug 21, 2010 at 02:13, John Stowers <john.stowers.li...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Fri, 2010-08-20 at 17:54 +0200, Tomeu Vizoso wrote: >> I know that pygtk doesn't have an excess of maintainers right now, but >> these modules should be relatively mature already. > > Agree. I was one of the first large-scale users of the GIO bindings, and > they took at least 2 cycles to get to a stable state. > > Finally, I would be saddened if the port to Python3 destabilised > PyGObject very much. PyGObject is stable software, and backward > compatibility breakages should be unacceptable (but deprecations > welcomed).
No backward compatibility breakages are planned, I was referring to introducing bugs that the test cases don't cover. Regards, Tomeu >> There's also the question of what to do with the Gtk and Gdk overrides >> in http://git.gnome.org/browse/pygobject/tree/gi/overrides and their >> tests, which don't really belong to pygobject. > > I can't comment on this one sorry. > > Regards, > > John > >> >> Any ideas? >> >> Thanks, >> >> Tomeu >> _______________________________________________ >> python-hackers-list mailing list >> python-hackers-l...@gnome.org >> http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/python-hackers-list > > > _______________________________________________ > python-hackers-list mailing list > python-hackers-l...@gnome.org > http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/python-hackers-list > _______________________________________________ pygtk mailing list pygtk@daa.com.au http://www.daa.com.au/mailman/listinfo/pygtk Read the PyGTK FAQ: http://faq.pygtk.org/