From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by arlo.cworth.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 013676DE0F82 for ; Sat, 16 Nov 2019 17:20:52 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at cworth.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.491 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.491 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.611, DATE_IN_PAST_06_12=1.103, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=disabled Received: from arlo.cworth.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (arlo.cworth.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 2BZdlU-LEOha for ; Sat, 16 Nov 2019 17:20:51 -0800 (PST) Received: from fethera.tethera.net (fethera.tethera.net [198.245.60.197]) by arlo.cworth.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 467236DE0F6A for ; Sat, 16 Nov 2019 17:20:51 -0800 (PST) Received: from remotemail by fethera.tethera.net with local (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1iW9F7-0000FX-TP; Sat, 16 Nov 2019 20:20:45 -0500 Received: (nullmailer pid 7439 invoked by uid 1000); Sat, 16 Nov 2019 16:44:57 -0000 From: David Bremner To: Gaute Hope , Floris Bruynooghe Cc: notmuch Subject: Re: Python3 cffi bindings In-Reply-To: References: <20191008210312.20685-1-flub@devork.be> Date: Sat, 16 Nov 2019 11:44:57 -0500 Message-ID: <87a78vu5x2.fsf@tethera.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-BeenThere: notmuch@notmuchmail.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "Use and development of the notmuch mail system." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 17 Nov 2019 01:20:52 -0000 Gaute Hope writes: > > By the way, it does not seem that the API is very far from the > previous python API. If it is close enough, perhaps it is possible to > get away with a bug version bump in the bindings rather than creating > a new package. I understand the need for a new package, but it would > be nice if we could avoid the future confusion of two python binding > packages (if at all possible). > I'm not in a good position to judge how similar the APIs are. It does seem like there are at least some breaking changes, and we usually try to make things smooth for people upgrading by deprecating interfaces before removing them completely. On the other hand our previous concern for supporting python pre 3.6 (I think. Maybe 3.5?) seems less and less worrying (except maybe for people using old CentOS like things). d