I understand that the bindings are developed from people like me, in the free time, but understand that like me there are many other people that spend a lot of time trying to port their code and finally they have to give up because many functions are not implemented in the porting.
If it would be clear that it was full of non introspectable functions (up and working in gtk3 as well as pygtk2, absent in the bindings) I would rather spend the time to rewrite the code of my apps directly in gtk3. Anyway I'm sorry if I offended somebody, I apologise. Regards, Giuseppe. On Thu, Jun 30, 2011 at 13:18, Tomeu Vizoso <[email protected]> wrote: > On Thu, Jun 30, 2011 at 12:56, Giuseppe Penone <[email protected]> wrote: > > Did anybody notice that the function > > > > gtk_clipboard_set_with_data () > > > > is missing from the bindings? > > > > <method name="set_with_data" > > c:identifier="gtk_clipboard_set_with_data" > > introspectable="0"> > > > > This is not a binding, this is a disaster. > > These bindings are developed by the community, which means things get > done only if people step up and help each other. > > If things aren't as stable as they could is because most of the PyGTK > users have stayed aside and pretended there were someone maintaining > the old bindings. For years. > > I'm sorry if you have just discovered that PyGObject is developed by > application authors just like you, who happen to have decided to give > back a bit to the community. > > Regards, > > Tomeu > > > _______________________________________________ > > pygtk mailing list [email protected] > > http://www.daa.com.au/mailman/listinfo/pygtk > > Read the PyGTK FAQ: http://faq.pygtk.org/ > > >
_______________________________________________ pygtk mailing list [email protected] http://www.daa.com.au/mailman/listinfo/pygtk Read the PyGTK FAQ: http://faq.pygtk.org/
