[pygtk] Porting pygtk to python 3
gerald.britton at gmail.com
Thu Feb 4 00:35:07 WST 2010
Any news on this initiative? I work on a pygtk-based project that is
considering moving to Python 3.x but we cannot until there is a
function pygtk availalble.
Is there a ETA or a roadmap?
On Mon, Nov 9, 2009 at 3:11 PM, Alex Dedul <rotmer at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 9, 2009 at 11:14 AM, Tomeu Vizoso <tomeu at sugarlabs.org> wrote:
>> On Mon, Nov 9, 2009 at 09:22, Rafael Villar Burke (Pachi)
>> <pachi at rvburke.com> wrote:
>>> Alex Dedul wrote:
>>>> Any news on porting pygtk to python 3 ? I would be glad to help maybe
>>>> almost full-time on this. Just would be good to know current status on
>>>> this matters first.. And if none projects or initiatives were already
>>>> started on this - is to okay then to just clone git repo and start
>>>> hacking ? Any things i better do before that like to notify some
>>>> people about this or the like ?
>>> AFAIK, the expected way to support python 3.x is through
>>> gobject-introspection generated bindings.
>>> If you want to help pushing forward python 3 support then, IMHO, it
>>> would be a good idea to help with the pybank and pygobject introspection
>>> work. This last project was mentioned on the mailing list some days ago.
>>> You should read the "[pygtk] introspection pygobject branch" thread
>>> starting on the 13rd of october this year for more information and
>>> pending tasks and try to contact the people working on it.
>>> Regards, and thanks for helping,
>> Yes, having introspection support means we don't have to port the
>> existing static bindings, making the move to 3.0 (and maybe pypy?)
>> more doable.
>> Some info:
>> All help is welcome.
> Thanks guys! I'll do some research on those matters and we'll see what
> do we have and what to do with all of that.
> With best regards from the Soul, Alex.
> pygtk mailing list pygtk at daa.com.au
> Read the PyGTK FAQ: http://faq.pygtk.org/
More information about the pygtk