Re: Proposed Modules, My Take

[Murray Cumming <murrayc murrayc com>]

On Wed, 2005-01-19 at 09:42 -0500, Sean Middleditch wrote:
> On Sun, 2005-01-16 at 11:57 +1100, Jeff Waugh wrote:
> 
> >  * pygtk
> > 
> > The consensus seemed to be that we clearly document that pygtk-based apps
> > are appropriate for the Desktop release rather than adding pygtk itself to
> > either Platform or Desktop. As yet, no pygtk-based apps have been proposed
> > for inclusion anyway.
> 
> Can a version of Python be declared to go with this if its in the
> Bindings?  Otherwise every distro could end up with a different version
> of Python resulting in various incompatibilities - especially in the
> case where multiple versions of Python are installed.

Distros probably do need to have multiple versions installed, in
parallel, because they are API/ABI incompatible.

GNOME Desktop applications that use python should specify the python
version in their #! line.

> Does /usr/bin/python reference the vesion with pygtk?  If apps
> hardcode /usr/bin/python-2.2 what happens on a distro that only has 2.3?

The distro should have 2.2 and/or patch it, I think. It's a distros job
to worry about this kind of thing.

> Both problems disappear if we mandate that, say, Python 2.3 be used and
> that all apps using the "official GNOME Bindings" reference python-2.3
> explicitly, or something like that.

That would be nice. It might be a problem if we all have to wait for the
module that is last to port to a new version.

-- 
Murray Cumming
murrayc murrayc com
www.murrayc.com
www.openismus.com