Re: Problem with GI and pygtk

Am 14.08.2014 um 07:51 schrieb Martin Pitt:
Simon Feltman [2014-08-13 17:30 -0700]:
I would honestly wouldn't mind if we renamed the project to PyGI. I
don't know if it helps in terms of being less confusing for people
trying to figure this stuff out, but I think it is a nicer looking
name without the baggage. Furthermore, it matches the functionality
and Python package name being provided.
Agreed. In Debian/Ubuntu the binary package names are now python-gi
and python3-gi, for that reason. So renaming the project/source
would be the last step for making this consistent again, and renaming
source packages/projects is fairly harmless in terms of breaking
existing code/dependencies.

Does anyone know who owns and how we can edit it?
Not exactly, but it seems to be a part of the realm. At
least it now says that PyGObject is now preferred, but that's not
quite strong enough to convey *how* obsolete and unmaintained it
actually is :/


Indeed, I was also confused. For me there are now 3 components. And the relationship between them is, at best, unclear to me.

pygtk: the original gtk bindings for python2; manually written in the beginnings, then based on pygobject
pygobject: ????
pygi: the new automated bindings, for python 2 and 3 (is that correct?)

To me it's clearer what pygi is than what pygobject is, so I think renaming would help a bit.

Best regards

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]