On 30 Apr, 2008, at 2:17, Brett Cannon wrote:
On Tue, Apr 29, 2008 at 3:03 PM, David Bolen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:"Brett Cannon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:Also realize all of the right people have been consulted on this stuff(e.g., the web SIG about the urllib package). So please do not think that something that seems drastic (e.g., the removal of allMac-specific modules) was taken lightly when in fact the proper peoplewere asked and they were okay with what is going on.Are there any thoughts on providing some other distribution or mechanism to build selected Mac modules post-removal? Is it likely to be possible to grab current 2.x source and build as part of 3.x, providing it's nota 64-bit system or UCS-4 configuration unsupported by bgen?I have an application using the QuickTime portion of the Carbon packagevery successfully in recent code (with a primarily Tiger-based userbase), where the higher level Cocoa/ObjC frameworks didn't provide the necessary functionality under Tiger - it would be nice to have some path to maintaining that across a 2.x/3.x transition, even if I had to buildsomething locally.Even when the code is removed it will still be in the svn history so you should be able to grab it easily.
More importantly: there is no reason why the Carbon stuff couldn't be released
as a standalone package. IMHO that's much better in the long run anyway because this allows updates to the Carbon bindings independent of Python releases. Ronald
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
_______________________________________________ Python-3000 mailing list Python-3000@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-3000 Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-3000/archive%40mail-archive.com
