[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Octopy patches for nested tree view
From: |
Rene Schallner |
Subject: |
Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Octopy patches for nested tree view |
Date: |
Fri, 6 May 2005 00:38:35 +0200 |
User-agent: |
KMail/1.8 |
On Thursday 05 May 2005 10:56, David Allouche wrote:
> On Wed, 2005-05-04 at 08:46 -0500, John A Meinel wrote:
> > David Allouche wrote:
> > > Nothing has happened to octopy for a very long time (more than one
> > > year), I think the original author has lost interest. If you feel up
> > > to it, you could probably adopt it.
> >
> > I was thinking the same thing. I also thought that it would be nice if
> > he could make it work with pyarch, and/or pybaz, since those seem to
> > be the most actively maintained python bindings.
Sounded like something sensible to do: There are some commonly agreed most
actively maintained python bindings for tla/baz -- so better use them (as
a library) instead of having both python bindings _and_ GUI stuff in a GUI
application.
> I would like that to happen (actually, octopy was one the projects that
> prompted the creation of pyarch in the first place), but I would not
> encourage it.
>
> PyArch has gone obsolete, as my focus in now on Bazaar, and PyBaz itself
> has little future.
>
> http://udu.wiki.ubuntu.com/PybazAndBzr
>
> If someone proposes improvements in pybaz, I will try to be more lenient
> in the next monthes since long term maintainability goals are now
> essentially void.
Now it is getting tricky. For higher level user interfaces written in
python (not necessarily GUIs), this is a bad situation:
pyarch got obsoleted in favour of pybaz (for bazaar).
pybaz will soon get obsoleted in favour of "bzr" (for bazaarNG).
(Note how it's all bazaar's fault :) )
Hmm. When thinking about John's suggestion: Would it be wise to
re-animate pyarch? Are there other python bindings for tla? Ones that
are actively maintained?
I think, for the near future, I'll stick to octopy's version of pyarch and
change it if needed. As for baz, I might get away with a minimal amount
of changes to the existing code by making the name of the tla executable
configurable (and some command / parameter names that go with it as well).
-Rene
pgpHu7Hp5NYIh.pgp
Description: PGP signature
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Octopy patches for nested tree view, David Allouche, 2005/05/03
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Octopy patches for nested tree view, John A Meinel, 2005/05/04
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Octopy patches for nested tree view, David Allouche, 2005/05/05
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Octopy patches for nested tree view, David Allouche, 2005/05/06
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Octopy patches for nested tree view, John A Meinel, 2005/05/07
- [Gnu-arch-users] PyArch/PyBaz road map, David Allouche, 2005/05/07
- [Gnu-arch-users] PyArch/PyBaz road map, David Allouche, 2005/05/07
- [Gnu-arch-users] Regarding pyarch future, Mikhael Goikhman, 2005/05/08
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Regarding pyarch future, David Allouche, 2005/05/08
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Regarding pyarch future, John A Meinel, 2005/05/08
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Regarding pyarch future, Mikhael Goikhman, 2005/05/08