Re: [pygtk] PyGTK in the standard Library
Thanks for the response (and to Christian RR), I'm getting the feeling that almost no one seems to think this is a workable idea, the main thing I was interested in guaging was which direction to take my exsisting editor project in... if it looked like people would push to see PyGTK in the standard libraries I would go in an IDLE influenced direction, if not I have a bit more freedom (I don't see the point in porting IDLE if your not aiming for the standard distibution, although I am likely to "borrow" a few bits!) The "Fat Python" project looks interesting I'll try and keep up with it. Matt On Wed, 2004-06-23 at 16:09, Michael McLay wrote: > On Friday 18 June 2004 8:59 am, Skip Montanaro wrote: > > Matt> There have been several discussions on the list in the last few > > Matt> months about trying to get PyGTK into the standard library, ... > > I would like to see PyGtk become part of the core Python distribution, > however, this is an unrealistic goal in the short term. There is no way that > PyGtk will be added to the next Python release. The alpha is going to be out > in about a month and PyGtk would be much to big of an addition at this late > date. It isn't clear that PyGtk is the "best" choice for replacing Tkinter. > Unless PyGtk takes a substantial lead over PyQt and wxPython it is unlikely > that Guido will approve the selection of one GUI toolkit over the others. > Also, the core developers would not want such a big addition to the code that > must be maintained in the official release. They will argue that PyGtk should > evolve separately. > > There is a second approach that is realistic and probably also more workable. > At PyCon we had a "Fat Python" BoF session. The goal was to build a super > distribution of Python that would include many Python based pieces of > software. I'd like to see PyGtk become a foundation piece for this > distribution. The distribution will most likely also include wxPython and > PyQt, but we should try to make PyGtk the preferred GUI platform for the > future of Python. (A few months ago I saw a reference to a hack that allowed > Qt and Gtk mainloops to be run in the same process. If it can be done, then I > would expect Python to be the language with the best chance of making it > possible to build apps that used widgets from both toolkits.) > > Discussion of the Fat Python distribution is on the python-grants mailing list > at: > > http://starship.python.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/python-grants > > There are a also a couple wiki pages on python.org that are being used to > organize the Fat Python distribution: > > http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/moinmoin/EducationalCd > > http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/moinmoin/EducationalCdLinux > > > > Matt> there where however a few buts... > > > > Matt> 1. Documentation - > > As a separate distribution from the core language the documentation shouldn't > be a problem. We distribute the PyGtk FAQ, API and Tutorials as part of the > Fat Python distribution. It doesn't need to be integrated into the core > Python manual. > > > Matt> 2. Windows - > > The Fat Python distribution is KNOPPIX based release. We will be picking > software that generally also is available on Windows, but for the first > release the Fat Python will use Linux as the target platform. There are other > distributions of Python that is targeting Windows. > > > Matt> 3.Idle - > > One of the other posts to this thread included someone volunteering to > re-target Idle to PyGtk. I think this is a grand idea. I hope others will > join this effort. > > > 4. Mac OSX - Is GTK available on Mac OSX without X11? Tkinter does have > > the advantage that TkAqua is available for non-X environments. > > For now the Gtk 2.0 release is only available on the Mac using the X11 API. > This is included with the latest OSX distribution, so it isn't a > show-stopper. I talked with Tamer Fahmy at PyCon about getting Gtk 2.0 ported > to Aqua. He was considering this as a summer project. I haven't talked with > him since the conference to see if anything has happened on this task. > > ___ pygtk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.daa.com.au/mailman/listinfo/pygtk Read the PyGTK FAQ: http://www.async.com.br/faq/pygtk/
Re: [pygtk] PyGTK in the standard Library
On Friday 18 June 2004 8:59 am, Skip Montanaro wrote: > Matt> There have been several discussions on the list in the last few > Matt> months about trying to get PyGTK into the standard library, ... I would like to see PyGtk become part of the core Python distribution, however, this is an unrealistic goal in the short term. There is no way that PyGtk will be added to the next Python release. The alpha is going to be out in about a month and PyGtk would be much to big of an addition at this late date. It isn't clear that PyGtk is the "best" choice for replacing Tkinter. Unless PyGtk takes a substantial lead over PyQt and wxPython it is unlikely that Guido will approve the selection of one GUI toolkit over the others. Also, the core developers would not want such a big addition to the code that must be maintained in the official release. They will argue that PyGtk should evolve separately. There is a second approach that is realistic and probably also more workable. At PyCon we had a "Fat Python" BoF session. The goal was to build a super distribution of Python that would include many Python based pieces of software. I'd like to see PyGtk become a foundation piece for this distribution. The distribution will most likely also include wxPython and PyQt, but we should try to make PyGtk the preferred GUI platform for the future of Python. (A few months ago I saw a reference to a hack that allowed Qt and Gtk mainloops to be run in the same process. If it can be done, then I would expect Python to be the language with the best chance of making it possible to build apps that used widgets from both toolkits.) Discussion of the Fat Python distribution is on the python-grants mailing list at: http://starship.python.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/python-grants There are a also a couple wiki pages on python.org that are being used to organize the Fat Python distribution: http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/moinmoin/EducationalCd http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/moinmoin/EducationalCdLinux > > Matt> there where however a few buts... > > Matt> 1. Documentation - As a separate distribution from the core language the documentation shouldn't be a problem. We distribute the PyGtk FAQ, API and Tutorials as part of the Fat Python distribution. It doesn't need to be integrated into the core Python manual. > Matt> 2. Windows - The Fat Python distribution is KNOPPIX based release. We will be picking software that generally also is available on Windows, but for the first release the Fat Python will use Linux as the target platform. There are other distributions of Python that is targeting Windows. > Matt> 3.Idle - One of the other posts to this thread included someone volunteering to re-target Idle to PyGtk. I think this is a grand idea. I hope others will join this effort. > 4. Mac OSX - Is GTK available on Mac OSX without X11? Tkinter does have > the advantage that TkAqua is available for non-X environments. For now the Gtk 2.0 release is only available on the Mac using the X11 API. This is included with the latest OSX distribution, so it isn't a show-stopper. I talked with Tamer Fahmy at PyCon about getting Gtk 2.0 ported to Aqua. He was considering this as a summer project. I haven't talked with him since the conference to see if anything has happened on this task. ___ pygtk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.daa.com.au/mailman/listinfo/pygtk Read the PyGTK FAQ: http://www.async.com.br/faq/pygtk/
Re: [pygtk] PyGTK in the standard Library
On Fri, 2004-06-18 at 20:32 -0300, Christian Robottom Reis wrote: > On Fri, Jun 18, 2004 at 10:27:28AM +0100, Matthew Bull wrote: > > There have been several discussions on the list in the last few months > > about trying to get PyGTK into the standard library, and whilst > > attending europython recently I had an opportunity to steer > > conversations in that direction with a lot of people to get a feel for > > the (european at least) communities take on this, most of the people I > > spoke to where non PyGTK folks, and the opinions seemed to be generally > > favourable. > [snip numerous arguments in favor of including pygtk] > > Summarizing the issues presented in this thread, we have the following > topics that want evaluation: > > - Combined Release pygtk is currently on the GNOME 6-monthly time-based release schedule. Unless the Python release schedule is the same as the GNOME release schedule (highly unlikely) then it can't really be on both schedules. I am always against putting things inside other commonly-distributed source tarballs just to get them distributed. pygtk is already quite well packaged on major distros. > > - API Stability > > - Tkinter, KDE and Python advocacy > > - Non-GTK+ packages > > - MacOS functionality > > - Use of Python's development infrastructure > > - Distribution of documentation > > I'm not even going to try fleshing these out, but whoever wants to argue > about inclusion needs to take these into serious consideration. > > One thing that popped up were two potential projects that somebody with > some free time or a lot of love for Python and PyGTK could try tackling: > > - IDLE Port > > - Integrated RAD Tool > > Thanks for chipping in with opinions and proposals, > -- > Christian Robottom Reis | http://async.com.br/~kiko/ | [+55 16] 261 2331 > ___ > pygtk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://www.daa.com.au/mailman/listinfo/pygtk > Read the PyGTK FAQ: http://www.async.com.br/faq/pygtk/ -- Murray Cumming [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.murrayc.com ___ pygtk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.daa.com.au/mailman/listinfo/pygtk Read the PyGTK FAQ: http://www.async.com.br/faq/pygtk/
Re: [pygtk] PyGTK in the standard Library
On Fri, Jun 18, 2004 at 10:27:28AM +0100, Matthew Bull wrote: > There have been several discussions on the list in the last few months > about trying to get PyGTK into the standard library, and whilst > attending europython recently I had an opportunity to steer > conversations in that direction with a lot of people to get a feel for > the (european at least) communities take on this, most of the people I > spoke to where non PyGTK folks, and the opinions seemed to be generally > favourable. [snip numerous arguments in favor of including pygtk] Summarizing the issues presented in this thread, we have the following topics that want evaluation: - Combined Release - API Stability - Tkinter, KDE and Python advocacy - Non-GTK+ packages - MacOS functionality - Use of Python's development infrastructure - Distribution of documentation I'm not even going to try fleshing these out, but whoever wants to argue about inclusion needs to take these into serious consideration. One thing that popped up were two potential projects that somebody with some free time or a lot of love for Python and PyGTK could try tackling: - IDLE Port - Integrated RAD Tool Thanks for chipping in with opinions and proposals, -- Christian Robottom Reis | http://async.com.br/~kiko/ | [+55 16] 261 2331 ___ pygtk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.daa.com.au/mailman/listinfo/pygtk Read the PyGTK FAQ: http://www.async.com.br/faq/pygtk/
Re: [pygtk] PyGTK in the standard Library
Hi all, as no nativ english speaker, I ask in advance for pardon because my bad english. > 1. Documentation - > > this is something that has been discussed on the list quite a few times > and actually I think the exsisting free docs are perfectly adequate it > seemed to mostly come from people who had tried PyGTK "back in the day" > (when I seem to remember there wasn't a lot of documentation) Your're right. It isn't easy to get some things to work. So I tried handled tables, but the documentation failed to existed. So I'm working with some scripts, to gasp the concept. Second, as beginner it's difficult to understand the different ways to work with pygtk as written in the tutorial. For experiened programmers is helpful to find new styles. > 3.Idle - > > Actually most people seemed to be oblivious to Idle but I can see it > would have to be ported to GTK (almost re-written) and this is where I > come in, I've already been doing some stuff with a simple text editor > written in python and PyGTK and I have some time available so if no one > else wants the job I'll take it on, help would be appreciated or if > someone else wants the job (or has already started it), my help is > offered. > So is this something the PyGTK community wants to see happen? I for one > would love to see PyGTK in the standard distro, (Tk is so long in > the tooth its untrue) and am willing to put in some work to see it > happen, so if its already happening put me to work!, if not could we > make it happen?? I thought a while ago about this question and tried to convert idle to gtk. It was like hell, since I was new to python and gtk. I think it the best to seperate the functionality of idle from the gui. So it would be quite easy to port it to anothers gui. As disadvantage it would be a little bit slower by this way of programming. Distribution: If there is an easy way to get the modules pygtk and gtk itself, it would be easier to distribute it separatly from python like the package win32all by Marc Hammond. Bye, Volker -- "Sie haben neue Mails!" - Die GMX Toolbar informiert Sie beim Surfen! Jetzt aktivieren unter http://www.gmx.net/info -- "Sie haben neue Mails!" - Die GMX Toolbar informiert Sie beim Surfen! Jetzt aktivieren unter http://www.gmx.net/info ___ pygtk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.daa.com.au/mailman/listinfo/pygtk Read the PyGTK FAQ: http://www.async.com.br/faq/pygtk/
Re: [pygtk] PyGTK in the standard Library
>> 1- PyGTK wraps GTK+ for Python. Which life-cycle do we follow, GTK's >> or Python's? Matt> Both this point and the one below are best answered by the library Matt> developers, if they are in favour of the idea of course :^) (I Matt> should make it clear I _use_ pyGTK, I'm not a developer) although Matt> to me following the GTK lifecycle then the python 'standard' Matt> version being the stable version at the time of the python release Matt> would make sense... GTK and PyGTK release cycles seem to be much Matt> faster than pythons I haven't used PyGTK enough to know, but is the GTK community's stance on breakage similar to that in the Python community? If not, simply shipping with "the stable version" of PyGTK when Python is released may cause more perceived Python breakage than that community normally expects. Skip ___ pygtk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.daa.com.au/mailman/listinfo/pygtk Read the PyGTK FAQ: http://www.async.com.br/faq/pygtk/
Re: [pygtk] PyGTK in the standard Library
On Fri, 2004-06-18 at 13:59, Skip Montanaro wrote: > Matt> There have been several discussions on the list in the last few > Matt> months about trying to get PyGTK into the standard library, ... > > Matt> there where however a few buts... > > Matt> 1. Documentation - > ... > Matt> 2. Windows - > ... > Matt> 3.Idle - > ... > > 4. Mac OSX - Is GTK available on Mac OSX without X11? Tkinter does have the >advantage that TkAqua is available for non-X environments. AFAIK no. but just to clear up a point I don't think anyones proposing that PyGTK replace Tkinter at this point. ___ pygtk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.daa.com.au/mailman/listinfo/pygtk Read the PyGTK FAQ: http://www.async.com.br/faq/pygtk/
Re: [pygtk] PyGTK in the standard Library
On Fri, 2004-06-18 at 13:41, Gustavo J. A. M. Carneiro wrote: > While I think that in principle this would be a good idea, there are > some management issues that would need to be resolved, such as: > 1- PyGTK wraps GTK+ for Python. Which life-cycle do we follow, GTK's or > Python's? Both this point and the one below are best answered by the library developers, if they are in favour of the idea of course :^) (I should make it clear I _use_ pyGTK, I'm not a developer) although to me following the GTK lifecycle then the python 'standard' version being the stable version at the time of the python release would make sense... GTK and PyGTK release cycles seem to be much faster than pythons > 2- Do we keep PyGTK's bugzilla, or use sourceforge's bug tracker (ugh!) > to integrate better with python; > 3- What happens to pyorbit and gnome-python? They probably don't belong > in python, anyway, but I needed to raise this point... they are essentially seperate right?? (although they do depend on pyGTK) so not really an issue, for instance I use Gnome but I only have PyGTK on my linux boxes > 4- Someone might bring up political question regarding the inclusion of > pygtk in detriment of pyqt; in particular, KDE's more intense > enthusiasts (=fanatics:) may stop liking python because of the inclusion > of pygtk; Interestingly I did have a few people say 'well what about PyQT' but no one mentioned WxPython (which I expected) although even people using PyQT pretty much agreed it wasn't really suitable its a very big library and it includes a lot of stuff that is already in the standard libs (qtsql for instance), and on linux I'm not sure that the packaging would change, (most linux distros package tkinter seperately anyhow) > > In spite of these issues, there are many advantages of including pygtk, > as you all know. But it also depends on the degree of freedom that > python's maintainers would be willing to give to pygtk developers, I > think... > > Just my 0.02 ¤... > > A Sex, 2004-06-18 às 10:27, Matthew Bull escreveu: > > I realise I'm quite new to this list but I've been working with PyGTK > > for a while now and would welcome peoples feedback on something. please > > put me straight if I'm treading on toes, or reiterating an old > > discussion. > > > > There have been several discussions on the list in the last few months > > about trying to get PyGTK into the standard library, and whilst > > attending europython recently I had an opportunity to steer > > conversations in that direction with a lot of people to get a feel for > > the (european at least) communities take on this, most of the people I > > spoke to where non PyGTK folks, and the opinions seemed to be generally > > favourable. > > > > there where however a few buts... > > > > 1. Documentation - > > > > this is something that has been discussed on the list quite a few times > > and actually I think the exsisting free docs are perfectly adequate it > > seemed to mostly come from people who had tried PyGTK "back in the day" > > (when I seem to remember there wasn't a lot of documentation) > > > > 2. Windows - > > > > many people seemed surprised that GTK ran on windows at all and others > > had been put of by all the various different ways of doing it, I have > > been reading the [Installation Problems on Win32] thread that seems to > > be raging on so I'll just add my two pence worth from what I've gathered > > so far the python community at large and the maintainers of the standard > > libraries would want a simple "drop it in" installer for the basic gtk > > runtime (a la dropline). > > > > 3.Idle - > > > > Actually most people seemed to be oblivious to Idle but I can see it > > would have to be ported to GTK (almost re-written) and this is where I > > come in, I've already been doing some stuff with a simple text editor > > written in python and PyGTK and I have some time available so if no one > > else wants the job I'll take it on, help would be appreciated or if > > someone else wants the job (or has already started it), my help is > > offered. > > > > So is this something the PyGTK community wants to see happen? I for one > > would love to see PyGTK in the standard distro, (Tk is so long in > > the tooth its untrue) and am willing to put in some work to see it > > happen, so if its already happening put me to work!, if not could we > > make it happen?? > > > > thanks for taking the time to read this > > > > Matt > > > > ___ > > pygtk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > http://www.daa.com.au/mailman/listinfo/pygtk > > Read the PyGTK FAQ: http://www.async.com.br/faq/pygtk/ ___ pygtk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.daa.com.au/mailman/listinfo/pygtk Read the PyGTK FAQ: http://www.async.com.br/faq/pygtk/
Re: [pygtk] PyGTK in the standard Library
Matt> There have been several discussions on the list in the last few Matt> months about trying to get PyGTK into the standard library, ... Matt> there where however a few buts... Matt> 1. Documentation - ... Matt> 2. Windows - ... Matt> 3.Idle - ... 4. Mac OSX - Is GTK available on Mac OSX without X11? Tkinter does have the advantage that TkAqua is available for non-X environments. -- Skip Montanaro Got gigs? http://www.musi-cal.com/submit.html Got spam? http://www.spambayes.org/ [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/
Re: [pygtk] PyGTK in the standard Library
While I think that in principle this would be a good idea, there are some management issues that would need to be resolved, such as: 1- PyGTK wraps GTK+ for Python. Which life-cycle do we follow, GTK's or Python's? 2- Do we keep PyGTK's bugzilla, or use sourceforge's bug tracker (ugh!) to integrate better with python; 3- What happens to pyorbit and gnome-python? They probably don't belong in python, anyway, but I needed to raise this point... 4- Someone might bring up political question regarding the inclusion of pygtk in detriment of pyqt; in particular, KDE's more intense enthusiasts (=fanatics:) may stop liking python because of the inclusion of pygtk; In spite of these issues, there are many advantages of including pygtk, as you all know. But it also depends on the degree of freedom that python's maintainers would be willing to give to pygtk developers, I think... Just my 0.02 ¤... A Sex, 2004-06-18 às 10:27, Matthew Bull escreveu: > I realise I'm quite new to this list but I've been working with PyGTK > for a while now and would welcome peoples feedback on something. please > put me straight if I'm treading on toes, or reiterating an old > discussion. > > There have been several discussions on the list in the last few months > about trying to get PyGTK into the standard library, and whilst > attending europython recently I had an opportunity to steer > conversations in that direction with a lot of people to get a feel for > the (european at least) communities take on this, most of the people I > spoke to where non PyGTK folks, and the opinions seemed to be generally > favourable. > > there where however a few buts... > > 1. Documentation - > > this is something that has been discussed on the list quite a few times > and actually I think the exsisting free docs are perfectly adequate it > seemed to mostly come from people who had tried PyGTK "back in the day" > (when I seem to remember there wasn't a lot of documentation) > > 2. Windows - > > many people seemed surprised that GTK ran on windows at all and others > had been put of by all the various different ways of doing it, I have > been reading the [Installation Problems on Win32] thread that seems to > be raging on so I'll just add my two pence worth from what I've gathered > so far the python community at large and the maintainers of the standard > libraries would want a simple "drop it in" installer for the basic gtk > runtime (a la dropline). > > 3.Idle - > > Actually most people seemed to be oblivious to Idle but I can see it > would have to be ported to GTK (almost re-written) and this is where I > come in, I've already been doing some stuff with a simple text editor > written in python and PyGTK and I have some time available so if no one > else wants the job I'll take it on, help would be appreciated or if > someone else wants the job (or has already started it), my help is > offered. > > So is this something the PyGTK community wants to see happen? I for one > would love to see PyGTK in the standard distro, (Tk is so long in > the tooth its untrue) and am willing to put in some work to see it > happen, so if its already happening put me to work!, if not could we > make it happen?? > > thanks for taking the time to read this > > Matt > > ___ > pygtk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://www.daa.com.au/mailman/listinfo/pygtk > Read the PyGTK FAQ: http://www.async.com.br/faq/pygtk/ -- Gustavo João Alves Marques Carneiro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> The universe is always one step beyond logic. ___ pygtk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.daa.com.au/mailman/listinfo/pygtk Read the PyGTK FAQ: http://www.async.com.br/faq/pygtk/
Re: [pygtk] PyGTK in the standard Library
Well - I have to say - I just joined the list a very short time ago, and just contributed a bit here and there to pygtk, but this email really inspired me to write about point n.3. My dream would really to be able to see gnome apps using a PyGTK-thing that worked like VBA - please dont kill me just yet, I will try to explain myself. A thing I really miss in the whole Gnome "experience", is something like what you can do in Word, Powerpoint, and other Windows apps that use COM and VB. Now, I hear you say: "But we can do that! We have bonobo! And the app developer has to add support for plugins. All you have to do is use your favorite editor/RAD and write the application". This is what I think could be improved - If there was some sort of VBA-like thing using PyGTK, that you can just "attach" to your application, that would make things so nice. I believe everything from an infrastructure point of view is already there: * Bonobo + the pygtk bonobo bindings * PyGTK * gtksourceview * Well - I know - it is a lot of work to put these things together, and then a lot of politics to convince people to use it. But I guess, if I had time to do it, I would try. One issue I see with the acceptance of this is that (I may be completely wrong here) some people may see Mono as the "silver bullet" for this problem. I am not that familiar with Mono to say for sure. Ah. Feel much better now :) --- Matthew Bull <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I realise I'm quite new to this list but I've been working with PyGTK > for a while now and would welcome peoples feedback on something. please > put me straight if I'm treading on toes, or reiterating an old > discussion. > > There have been several discussions on the list in the last few months > about trying to get PyGTK into the standard library, and whilst > attending europython recently I had an opportunity to steer > conversations in that direction with a lot of people to get a feel for > the (european at least) communities take on this, most of the people I > spoke to where non PyGTK folks, and the opinions seemed to be generally > favourable. > > there where however a few buts... > > 1. Documentation - > > this is something that has been discussed on the list quite a few times > and actually I think the exsisting free docs are perfectly adequate it > seemed to mostly come from people who had tried PyGTK "back in the day" > (when I seem to remember there wasn't a lot of documentation) > > 2. Windows - > > many people seemed surprised that GTK ran on windows at all and others > had been put of by all the various different ways of doing it, I have > been reading the [Installation Problems on Win32] thread that seems to > be raging on so I'll just add my two pence worth from what I've gathered > so far the python community at large and the maintainers of the standard > libraries would want a simple "drop it in" installer for the basic gtk > runtime (a la dropline). > > 3.Idle - > > Actually most people seemed to be oblivious to Idle but I can see it > would have to be ported to GTK (almost re-written) and this is where I > come in, I've already been doing some stuff with a simple text editor > written in python and PyGTK and I have some time available so if no one > else wants the job I'll take it on, help would be appreciated or if > someone else wants the job (or has already started it), my help is > offered. > > So is this something the PyGTK community wants to see happen? I for one > would love to see PyGTK in the standard distro, (Tk is so long in > the tooth its untrue) and am willing to put in some work to see it > happen, so if its already happening put me to work!, if not could we > make it happen?? > > thanks for taking the time to read this > > Matt > > ___ > pygtk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://www.daa.com.au/mailman/listinfo/pygtk > Read the PyGTK FAQ: http://www.async.com.br/faq/pygtk/ > __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail is new and improved - Check it out! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail ___ pygtk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.daa.com.au/mailman/listinfo/pygtk Read the PyGTK FAQ: http://www.async.com.br/faq/pygtk/
[pygtk] PyGTK in the standard Library
I realise I'm quite new to this list but I've been working with PyGTK for a while now and would welcome peoples feedback on something. please put me straight if I'm treading on toes, or reiterating an old discussion. There have been several discussions on the list in the last few months about trying to get PyGTK into the standard library, and whilst attending europython recently I had an opportunity to steer conversations in that direction with a lot of people to get a feel for the (european at least) communities take on this, most of the people I spoke to where non PyGTK folks, and the opinions seemed to be generally favourable. there where however a few buts... 1. Documentation - this is something that has been discussed on the list quite a few times and actually I think the exsisting free docs are perfectly adequate it seemed to mostly come from people who had tried PyGTK "back in the day" (when I seem to remember there wasn't a lot of documentation) 2. Windows - many people seemed surprised that GTK ran on windows at all and others had been put of by all the various different ways of doing it, I have been reading the [Installation Problems on Win32] thread that seems to be raging on so I'll just add my two pence worth from what I've gathered so far the python community at large and the maintainers of the standard libraries would want a simple "drop it in" installer for the basic gtk runtime (a la dropline). 3.Idle - Actually most people seemed to be oblivious to Idle but I can see it would have to be ported to GTK (almost re-written) and this is where I come in, I've already been doing some stuff with a simple text editor written in python and PyGTK and I have some time available so if no one else wants the job I'll take it on, help would be appreciated or if someone else wants the job (or has already started it), my help is offered. So is this something the PyGTK community wants to see happen? I for one would love to see PyGTK in the standard distro, (Tk is so long in the tooth its untrue) and am willing to put in some work to see it happen, so if its already happening put me to work!, if not could we make it happen?? thanks for taking the time to read this Matt ___ pygtk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.daa.com.au/mailman/listinfo/pygtk Read the PyGTK FAQ: http://www.async.com.br/faq/pygtk/
