Tools

piotras said

piotras  

I wonder if we could stop maintaining python-midgard in favor of PyGi. ping @tepheikk @W_I

6 comments

piotras posted to #midgard 09.03.2011 (en)

6 comments

Bottom

jwa  

@piotras Seems that PyGi has been merged to PyGObject!?

jwa commented on posted to #midgard 09.03.2011 (en)

indeyets  

@jwa yes, but the question is about using current "old style" pygobject API vs. auto-generated PyGI API. there is a difference between them

indeyets commented on posted to #midgard Aptekarskiy 09.03.2011 (en)

piotras  

GObject Introspection in Python can be only better. python-midgard can be only older.

piotras commented on posted to #midgard 09.03.2011 (en)

bergie  

This would make sense at some point. Having two ways to access Midgard2 (automatic bindings via PyGI and hand-built python-midgard2) is bad for documentation and code-sharing, and of course maintaining the bindings is a burden.

As another plus this would give more exposure to Midgard's GObject Introspection bindings, which is something that is very useful as we start slowly using also MidgardCR.

bergie commented on posted to #midgard Hietalahti 09.03.2011 (en)

W_I  

Sounds good. I would be happy to convert all my current python code to use the PyGi...

W_I commented on posted to #midgard 09.03.2011 (en)

bergie  

@W_I I trust you've also seen the effort to make a ZeroMQ API into Midgard

bergie commented on posted to #midgard Hietalahti 10.03.2011 (en)

Login or register to leave a comment

Publicity
These messages are public and can be seen by anyone.