On Sun, 2004-03-07 at 23:10, Gustavo J. A. M. Carneiro wrote: > A Dom, 2004-03-07 �s 19:02, Murray Cumming escreveu: > > On Fri, 2004-03-05 at 16:14, Christian Robottom Reis wrote: > > > Hey there, > > > > > > We're providing a new PyGTK release candidate for testing: > > > > > > http://www.gnome.org/~jdahlin/pygtk-2.2.0-RC1.tar.gz > > > > That's great. Well done, and I hope this means you'll try to put pygtk > > on the GNOME Platform Bindings 2.7/2.8 schedule. > > Not likely happen, I'm afraid. We're not willing to split > gnome-python just to be part of some "meta package". > To justify this position, I can think of at least the following > arguments: > > 1- Distributions can already split gnome-python into individual binary > packages (one per python module) as they want, and many already do just > that, such as Fedora; > > 2- All modules are optional, dependent on the respective C libraries; > > 3- The split between developer and desktop platform is time varying. > For example, I can foresee libgnomeprint* becoming part of developer > platform sooner or later. Perhaps even gtkhtml2, who knows? Are we > going to keep moving bindings from one package to another as modules are > added to devel platform in the future? > > If the GNOME Platform Bindings release team is willing to amend the > rules, we are willing to make an effort to follow release schedule and > maintain API compatibility.
Is that the official decision of the gnome-python maintainer? -- Murray Cumming www.murrayc.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] _______________________________________________ pygtk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.daa.com.au/mailman/listinfo/pygtk Read the PyGTK FAQ: http://www.async.com.br/faq/pygtk/
