On 07/11/2013 02:33 PM, Gordon Sim wrote:
On 07/11/2013 02:01 PM, Darryl L. Pierce wrote:
I'm doing some work with the swigged Python bindings (not the pure
Python implementation of Qpid) and want to get some insight into how, if
at all, these bindings are being used by anybody currently.
Do you have a project that's using the Swig-generated bindings; i.e.,
the ones that are in the cqpid module? If so, how much do you feel it
would impact your development if we were to, in future, move these
bindings to a module named differently?
[ ] No impact
[ ] Some impact
[ ] Major impact
Would you prefer a module named something more like:
[x] qpid_messaging
Actually I think I'd prefer qpidc_messaging to give a hint as to its
nature. (Sorry for hogging the thread!).
[ ] qpid.cmessaging
[ ] Please don't change the module
I appreciate your time and feedback.
I am using the swigged implementation just to do some testing of the
underlying c++ client (writing tests in python is more enjoyable!). I
personally prefer qpid_messaging for its simplicity. I do think a name
change is worth considering as cqpid is rather ambiguous and unclear.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
