I haven't received the original email, for some reason, so apologies for respoding in wrong place in thread. Removing is a bad idea, although adding quality warning seems like a good idea: qt is failing *7* tests out of 3034, all but one i; that doesn't seem to merit removing it. If there were serious problems I would expect we would have many bug reports from qt users, but we don't. cf... dunno. tsreactor is private in twisted - starts with _, so it doesn't really guarantee anything or make any promises about working, and it's very useful for integrating with broken event loops. wxreactor is a tsreactor wrapper which makes it suck less for the wx case. AFAICT wx is one of the most popular ui toolkits for python, so people will want to use it; wxreactor for all it faults is in most cases going to be way better than whatever people try to do on their own, especially if the branch I have lying around is ever merged. The basic argument here is the same: 1. People want to use these GUI toolkits. 2. They will thus either drop Twisted and write their own networking framework, or they will write their own GUI integration code. Both of these cases result in code that is likely will be worse than our current providing. So as long we are up front and visible about existing limitations in these reactors, our users benefit by us including them.