Hello Dmity, Dmitry Selyutin <ghostman...@gmail.com> writes:
> thank you for this patch. While I'm impressed with the amount of work > and appreciate the whole direction, I must admit that I'm going to > rewrite the largest part of the original gnulib-tool.py. Once > completed, the new implementation will make all these efforts and > cleanups useless. Would you consider 'python' branch as the place for > your Python work? As far as I know there is no need to do the same > work as you did here, because all imports are correct and done as > required by PEP8 and similar documents. Sorry, I was unaware of that branch. What about adding some information about the gnulib-tool.py development process in a "README-hacking" file? Since there is no "gnulib-tool.py" nor unit tests for the pygnulib module in that branch how are you working on it? with the REPL? Am I overlooking something? > Anyway, if you think that this patch is required, I can surely push > it, it's absolutely OK from my point of view. But really, I would be > glad if you could join the active development under 'python' > branch. :-) I would be happy to get involved in this development which will a good excuse for improving my Python skills. Given that the "python" branch seems like a full rewrite of the pygnulib module, there is not much interest in applying my patch. Thanks. -- Mathieu Lirzin GPG: F2A3 8D7E EB2B 6640 5761 070D 0ADE E100 9460 4D37
