[PySide] PySide evaluation
Aaron Richiger
a.richi at bluewin.ch
Mon Jan 14 22:23:03 CET 2013
I'm glad about the amount of traffic on the mailing list. Such
discussions are either the end of a project or the beginning of a new
process. Let's hope it's the first step towards the next PySide
generation. The times of describing a problem and waiting for the
solution of the development team are definitely over, so if we want this
project to continue, we have to help ourselves. I think, before deciding
implementation details, we have to stand one step back and answer the
following questions one after the other:
- What are our goals for PySide?
- Which development team would be available?
- How much money is needed/available?
With this information, we can decide which of the defined goals are
realistic to implement...
To get, document and archive this information, I created a little
survey. Please do not answer the questions now already, because I would
like to get the feedback of some of you about missing/superfuous questions.
Could some of you visit the following link and just click "Continue"
until the end, read everything, but not submit or answer anything and
give me some feedback:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/viewform?fromEmail=true&formkey=dHVNa1d3dVpvdFdJV1U3THBxVVk2Tnc6MQ
Thanks. Then we can start the official survey tomorrow or so.
Cheers
Aaron
Am 14.01.2013 19:16, schrieb John Ehresman:
> On 1/14/13 12:18 PM, Fabien Castan wrote:
>> I'm not enthusiastic about a rewrite using swig; it seems to be a lot of
>> work for questionable benefits.
>>
>> The main benefit could be to get a bigger community and concentrate
>> efforts on the binding rules, instead of working on a binding tool.
> I don't think the binding tool as needing a lot of effort. We do need
> more people fixing bugs and improving the binding rules, but that is the
> case with either tool. If we were starting from scratch, I'd think swig
> would be something to look at, but we aren't starting from scratch.
>
>> I think much of the work with PySide is
>> writing a Python binding given the specifics of how Qt works so it's
>> less about using a semi-generic tool such as swiq or shiboken and more
>> about how Qt object lifetime works.
>>
>> Yes, but users also need to bind their own widgets... And your widgets
>> use your core objects... so you need to use the same binding
>> tool everywhere.
>> A generic binding tool could help for that.
> You are correct that users need to either use one binding tool for all
> qt related interfaces or do extra work to use something else. This
> would be true with swig or shiboken or anything else.
>
> Cheers,
>
> John
> _______________________________________________
> PySide mailing list
> PySide at qt-project.org
> http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/pyside
More information about the PySide
mailing list