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 14:19:17 GMT
On 07/11/2013 02:33 PM, Gordon Sim wrote:
> 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

Actually I think I'd prefer qpidc_messaging to give a hint as to its 
nature. (Sorry for hogging the thread!).

>> [ ] 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