qpid-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Gordon Sim <g...@redhat.com>
Subject Re: Swigged Python bindings...
Date Thu, 11 Jul 2013 13:33:54 GMT
On 07/11/2013 02:01 PM, Darryl L. Pierce wrote:
> I'm doing some work with the swigged Python bindings (not the pure
> Python implementation of Qpid) and want to get some insight into how, if
> at all, these bindings are being used by anybody currently.
> Do you have a project that's using the Swig-generated bindings; i.e.,
> the ones that are in the cqpid module? If so, how much do you feel it
> would impact your development if we were to, in future, move these
> bindings to a module named differently?
> [ ] No impact
> [ ] Some impact
> [ ] Major impact
> Would you prefer a module named something more like:
> [x] qpid_messaging
> [ ] qpid.cmessaging
> [ ] Please don't change the module
> I appreciate your time and feedback.

I am using the swigged implementation just to do some testing of the 
underlying c++ client (writing tests in python is more enjoyable!). I 
personally prefer qpid_messaging for its simplicity. I do think a name 
change is worth considering as cqpid is rather ambiguous and unclear.

To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@qpid.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@qpid.apache.org

View raw message