On Friday July 11 2003 17:17, Jonathan Gardner wrote: > On Friday 11 July 2003 15:44, Jim Bublitz wrote: > > On Friday July 11 2003 10:19, Jonathan Gardner wrote: > Jim, you are heading in the right direction. Somewhere in my > previous email, I meant to have written, "Jim is doing this, > so this problem will be going away soon." I might've lost it > on the edits. I absolutely do not want you to feel > discouraged. That's like "biting the hands that feeds me".
Nah, no problem. I'm not discouraged. I'm disappointed that PyKDE isn't where it should be, but there honestly hasn't been much I could do about. I also dislike the fact I haven't incorporated other people's contributions very quickly. Feel free to say anything that's on your mind - I'm relatively difficult to insult and nowhere near the point of being insulted. I'm unlikely to sulk or quit because someone posts something to the list. Usually I have lots of uncomitted time I can spend on PyKDE, and I just haven't had much if any of that lately. Things seems to be getting back to normal now. > I guess what I really would like to see is sip, PyQt, and > PyKDE become more independent of each other. sip, PyQt, and > PyKDE are like conjoined triplets. PyQt is rarely a problem for PyKDE, but of course PyKDE depends heavily on sip and Phil has done a lot of work on sip to make PyKDE possible and as complete as it is. > How can this be done? I don't know. There are too many > problems in seperating them. Maybe someone brighter than me > can see a way. I'm open to suggestion, but I don't see anything that would help much at the moment. Jim _______________________________________________ PyKDE mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mats.imk.fraunhofer.de/mailman/listinfo/pykde