On Fri, 2013-06-21 at 13:08 -0400, Bill Freeman wrote: > On Thu, Jun 20, 2013 at 4:46 PM, Andrew Stitcher <[email protected]>wrote: > > > I actually thought this was uncontroversial because we've indicated it > > is a deprecated API for so long. Is there still actually anything that > > users can't do with the messaging API that can do with the client API? > > > > Depending on how you define "users" and "do", yes. The python QMF > console.py library uses the old API, and I use the console.py library. I > don't actually touch the underlying old API, so a replacement python > console using the Messaging API that provides the same interface to my code > would leave me happy. I don't know whether that can be done with the > Messaging API or not. But until there is such a replacement, I'd object to > removal of the API (as opposed to removal of the documentation, which, from > my perspective, is already gone).
Could you be specific about this? is the python QMF console.py library dependent on some SWIG wrapped C++ code or is it dependent on the original *python* client code? If it helps - am not removing any python libraries in this proposed change - although I am removing some swig wrapped binding libraries (but the old client library was never wrapped like this, which is what is confusing me). If you know the exact set of dependencies here it would really help me understand the implications. Andrew --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
