On Fri, Nov 14, 2008 at 8:38 PM, Hamilton Link <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> ... > > I suppose the first question is, > Why are there no apparent build instructions in the distribution? > Hi there - unfortunately I think the problem is that it would take a large effort to come up with a build process that works reliably for all possible platforms (mono, win32), python versions, unicode requirements, build toolchains, etc. Consequently, the docs are kind of all over the place. Thus far, while python.net has been useful for some people, I don't think the user community is large enough yet for any group of people to get together to put together anything really comprehensive in terms of distribution tools or docs. > It seems that there are more than half a dozen build configurations (python > 2.3, 4, 5, and 6, plus UCS2/4 distinctions for 5 and 6, plus clr.so/.dll > being built for a 32- or 64-bit system) and a couple of possible build > environments (VS or Mono+make), so breaking this all down for first timers > would really, really be appreciated. If I've just missed them, I apologize, > but the only thing I've been able to find so far is > > http://feihonghsu.blogspot.com/2008/02/installing-pythonnet-20-alpha-2-on.html > and > http://feihonghsu.blogspot.com/2008/02/pythonnet-20-for-net-sp1_15.html > which are _great_ but they are at an unaffiliated web site, are only Visual > Studio instructions, and don't cover targeting 32/64 bit. I should also > mention that if there really aren't official build instructions I will > happily write some up (cribbing somewhat from Mr. Feihong Hsu if he agrees) > as soon as I have a clear understanding of the process and can do it > successfully, and I'll stick that into svn if I can or post it to the > mailing list for a dev to add if I can't. If you're willing to write some, I'm willing to give you whatever access you need to get them in svn ;) If anyone thinks a lighter weight tool would help, we could set up a mediawiki instance or something as well... > How actively maintained is PythonNet at the moment? > > It looks like since the project was made to work patches have become > infrequent, which I will take to mean that things work reasonably well. But > this putative .net SP1 patch ( > http://mail.python.org/pipermail/pythondotnet/2008-January/000771.html ) > was not apparently folded into SVN, was there a reason for this? > I can only speak for myself as the original author -- for my part, the project that allowed me to do the original work on this is ancient history. While I have an ongoing geeky interest and have on occasion been able to do small spurts of work, its unlikely I will be able to work on this substantively in the near future. To their credit, many of the folks who have used the system have stepped up to contribute changes when they have run up against problems. I have, and will continue to, give those folks access to sourceforge etc. to improve the platform as they are able. But my impression is that where we are now is a situation where people can "scratch their own itch", but there is no organized effort to track the .NET or mono platform changes going forward. My opinion is that it will take an invested champion to make that happen. FWIW, Resolver and others seem to be using some of the code and concepts from python.net to further use of native extensions with IronPython -- that may also be a good avenue to explore if you're looking for long-term supportability (and I'm sure resolver would welcome the help!) -Brian
_________________________________________________ Python.NET mailing list - PythonDotNet@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pythondotnet
