No worries Thomas. I'll keep python-xdg as a separate project, it's not bad to have an alternative. I mostly enjoy the mimetype api, for which I have pretty extensive tests. Feel free to look around.
J. Leclanche On Mon, Dec 3, 2012 at 9:46 PM, Thomas Kluyver <[email protected]> wrote: > On 3 December 2012 21:08, Jerome Leclanche <[email protected]> wrote: > >> However I'd be more inclined to figure out if the *spec* not providing a >> fallback is a good idea. What's wrong with assuming .local/run or something? > > > I think there are some security issues, although I'm not quite clear about > the details. The spec also says that the runtime directory needs to support > all Unix file-like features - named pipes, hard links, and so on. If the > user's home directory is on NFS, for example, that may not hold. My > understanding is that Ubuntu now creates an entire separate mount point (at > /run/user) to ensure the conditions are met. > > Thanks, > Thomas > > P.S. Jerome, I haven't forgotten your suggestion that your python-xdg > implementation should replace PyXDG. But I'm increasingly convinced that > it's important to keep the API as stable as possible. It's already used in > a lot of places, and I don't think many projects are interested in dealing > with API changes. Even the refactoring I've done has accidentally broken a > couple of things. So I've been focussing on adding tests ( > http://cgit.freedesktop.org/xdg/pyxdg/tree/test ) and docs ( > http://pyxdg.readthedocs.org/en/latest/index.html ). You're more than > welcome to help with that - perhaps we should merge some of the bits of > python-xdg that PyXDG doesn't yet have. >
_______________________________________________ xdg mailing list [email protected] http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/xdg
