Re: gnome-python split proposal
"John (J5) Palmieri" <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.gnome.gtk+.python,gmane.comp.gnome.language-bindings |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On Sat, 2004-08-28 at 18:59, Christian Robottom Reis wrote: > On Sat, Aug 28, 2004 at 06:07:59PM +0100, Gustavo J. A. M. Carneiro wrote: > > I would like to know what the pygtk/gnome community thinks about > > splitting gnome-python, according to the following plan: > > > > - gnome-python keeps the modules that are part of gnome developer > > platform[1]: > > o gnome, gnome.ui, gnome.vfs, gnome.canvas > > o bonobo, bonobo.activation, bonobo.ui > > o gconf > > > > - We create a new pygtk-extra package containing everything else, > > including: > > o gnome.applet > > o gnome.nautilus > > o gtkhtml2 > > o gnomeprint, gnomeprint.ui > > Given that most/all packages are gnome-dependent, we should probably > just have gnome-python-extra include the gnome bits we want, and leave > pygtk-extra for whenever it becomes necessary. > > People could request addition of pygtk-only modules in > gnome-python-extra for now if they wanted "official" distribution from > pygtk.org. > > > I believe this split leaves gnome-python in a better position for > > inclusion in the next gnome bindings release. > > Agreed 100%. Murray will be proud <wink>. I thought Murray said that just having compile switches with the default building only the gnome platform bits would be acceptable to him. Either way, whatever gets python bindings as part of the official gnome bindings release sounds good to me. -- J5 _______________________________________________ pygtk mailing list [email protected] http://www.daa.com.au/mailman/listinfo/pygtk Read the PyGTK FAQ: http://www.async.com.br/faq/pygtk/