Re: Porting of Python extensions?

[Xan Lopez <xan gnome org>]

On Thu, Jul 2, 2009 at 6:11 PM, Michael Torrie<torriem gmail com> wrote:
> Xan Lopez wrote:
>> Open bugs with the extensions and me or someone else will surely port
>> those, they sound pretty simple.
>
> Good to know.  These are extensions I wrote myself, though.  Do the
> epiphany developers really want to be in the business of custom-coding
> end users' plugins?

Well, if the extensions are simple (as these sound to be), potentially
useful to some people, you are not interested in porting them and I
can make you happier and reduce the annoyance of dropping Python by
porting them, I'll try to do it. Of course my time is limited and I
have a million things to do, so don't expect miracles :)

It's also good in general to have simple, contained problems to give
to newcomers, so worst case I con point someone to your code next time
they ask me what simple tasks they can try to help with.

Finally, unless the extension is totally ridiculous I think it's good
to have them upstream generally, that way you can point people to a
central location to get them.

> On the other hand, all my plugins do is implement behavior that galeon
> had that I can't live without.  That might be something other users are
> interested in.  Maybe a feature request should be opened to get these
> optional behaviors added to epiphany.
>
> In any event I will do nothing about this until the stock rpm of
> epiphany in my distro (currently Fedora 11) has dropped python support.
> _______________________________________________
> epiphany-list mailing list
> epiphany-list gnome org
> http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/epiphany-list
>