Sounds like a good plan.

On Feb 19, 2018 04:57, "Bob Kline" <> wrote:

> On Mon, Feb 19, 2018 at 2:25 AM, Vernon D. Cole <>
> wrote:
> > I will try to clear this up as much as I can...
> Thanks very much for your reply, Vernon.
> > Adodbapi lives in two places, as a stand-alone project on Sourceforge,
> and
> > integrated with PyWin32.
> Well, I wouldn't go so far as saying it "lives" in the GitHub project;
> more like it's on life support. :-) As far as I can tell, it's never
> actually been usable from that repo, as the required file
> didn't make it to the party.
> > The Sourceforge project is needed for Iron Python, and has more
> > documentation, and, originally, a faster upgrade cycle.
> I see, however, that the code to support IronPython is in both places,
> documentation can easily be enhanced, and (as you acknowledge) the
> upgrade cycle for the SourceForge project has gone walkabout. It would
> seem ideal (if nothing else, from the perspective of the attempt to
> attract more maintainers) if we didn't have to maintain two separate
> code bases.
> > The SF code was copied to pywin32 for easier installation and more
> > convenience, but the file layout is slightly different. I did not have
> the
> > capability to test the pywin32 installation so was unaware of the problem
> > until too late. Then I went to work for another company which did not use
> > Windows at all, so everything got kind of lost.
> >
> > The move of pywin32 to GitHub, along with improved testing there will
> help
> > to fix things.  I am also building an SQL server test bench which I hope
> > will be permanent. A patch has been submitted to fix the "missing file"
> > problem, and I have changed my SF notifications to a different email
> address
> > that I check more frequently.
> >
> > The python-win project is the preferred maintenance place.
> Perhaps a note on the SourceForge page to that effect would be appropriate.
> > Meanwhile ... I am not getting any younger and an active back-up
> maintainer
> > for the home adodbapi project would be very welcome if someone were
> willing
> > to help out. At the present moment the "bus size" is one -- which is a
> bad
> > thing.
> I'm happy to do what I can, though as I pointed out in an earlier
> thread, you're younger than I am. :-)
> If you provide instructions for getting the regression tests running,
> I'll try to replicate them here.
> Let's first decide the question of how many places we're going to
> maintain the package. I vote for one (on GitHub). If (for whatever
> reason) it's necessary to maintain it in two places, let's (a) decide
> whether it's possible to keep the two places synchronized so they
> don't drift into forks of each other; (b) figure out how such
> synchronization will be accomplished; and most important (c) make it
> very clear in both locations what the relationship is between the two
> repositories, telling everyone which one should be used in which
> situation, where to file issue tracking tickets, etc.
> Thanks again for your willingness to bring this project back to life.
> --
> Bob Kline
python-win32 mailing list

Reply via email to