[Python.NET] questions from a new PythonNet user

Hamilton Link helink at sandia.gov
Tue Dec 2 01:04:18 CET 2008

Brian Lloyd wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 14, 2008 at 8:38 PM, Hamilton Link <helink at sandia.gov 
> <mailto:helink at sandia.gov>> wrote:
>     ...
>     I suppose the first question is,
>     Why are there no apparent build instructions in the distribution?
> Hi there - unfortunately I think the problem is that it would take a 
> large effort
> to come up with a build process that works reliably for all possible 
> platforms
> (mono, win32), python versions, unicode requirements, build 
> toolchains, etc.
> Consequently, the docs are kind of all over the place.
> Thus far, while python.net <http://python.net> has been useful for 
> some people, I don't think the
> user community is large enough yet for any group of people to get 
> together to
> put together anything really comprehensive in terms of distribution 
> tools or
> docs.
> If you're willing to write some, I'm willing to give you whatever 
> access you need to
> get them in svn ;) If anyone thinks a lighter weight tool would help, 
> we could set up
> a mediawiki instance or something as well...

Python.net serves a niche's niche's niche, so I don't expect it will 
ever have too many users.  But SVN access would be great, thanks.  I 
will try to put in a README of some sort that combines the relevant 
documentation I can find plus whatever works for me into a 
(disclaimer-ed) set of build instructions.

Also if I am able to do a before/after test of the .net SP1 patch would 
anyone mind if I committed that into the repository?

Also, if the SP1 patch and anything else goes in to the trunk (and if I 
can figure out how to do it) I will package a new distro that includes 
the setup.py script and the patches and I'll put it on sourceforge as 
alpha 3 or some such.  But don't hold your breath until it's already 
done, 'k?

>     How actively maintained is PythonNet at the moment?
> I have, and will continue to, give those folks access to
> sourceforge etc. to improve the platform as they are able. But my 
> impression is
> that where we are now is a situation where people can "scratch their 
> own itch", but
> there is no organized effort to track the .NET or mono platform 
> changes going
> forward. My opinion is that it will take an invested champion to make 
> that happen.
> FWIW, Resolver and others seem to be using some of the code and 
> concepts from
> python.net <http://python.net> to further use of native extensions 
> with IronPython -- that may also be a
> good avenue to explore if you're looking for long-term supportability 
> (and I'm sure
> resolver would welcome the help!)
> -Brian
Well, for what it's worth, for the near future I have a vested interest 
in making sure python.net works on linux, windows, and os x.  IronPython 
isn't an option for me.  Other good news is that mono now claims 
approximate 2.0 compliance and so the underpinnings of the CLR shouldn't 
change for a good while yet, minimizing portability issues.  The bad 
news is most of my time is being spent on other projects than this one.

Beyond extensive testing we'll see what happens.  I can't promise I'll 
be in a place to debug any problems, since I'm not really a python 
programmer.  And I _really_ can't promise upgrades for python 2.6 (if it 
doesn't already work... haven't tried it) or python 3.x.


More information about the PythonDotNet mailing list