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 CB3DE6DE3305 for ; Mon, 26 Mar 2018 13:47:26 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at cworth.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.23 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.23 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN=0.249, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, 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 MTUwCm2L4g49 for ; Mon, 26 Mar 2018 13:47:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-wm0-f46.google.com (mail-wm0-f46.google.com [74.125.82.46]) by arlo.cworth.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 17F8B6DE3302 for ; Mon, 26 Mar 2018 13:47:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-wm0-f46.google.com with SMTP id v21so17917702wmc.1 for ; Mon, 26 Mar 2018 13:47:25 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=sender:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id :mime-version; bh=ohoOhQ4npiWEYLwZhEciBJiVPCOqwzEzro36RMnTgCw=; b=svY6k+kbx7TAbu3ytNPckpt8fEMSfuwC/K+FQBwQFzhE1k7dZT9VEAQZ4SCc2oAHXz VndMpzRQ5vIv9DOYzLXkmvW/gkgG1FmS0OIFiFww35MVALQiR3xLB45N31wT99A9dUo7 Ito7Hl9t2WN0uqoDd6lgxpE7GNpBb70B+XqBuKAcDu2jbTNQKpWfSM/IavMpxNDfjK4p rA0txriX/cAAvuIkkjtOxXstcasaih692dpxm7PSSgoUKNp9bR7KYTBg8ZC0Zurv/VJ7 yFGn4btqPjH+kxK3pioDPOS3t/LcOUi/0yTI1ddaDmFL2AK1V+DbVsylqtiuMbMZRpDw Rwqg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:sender:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:references :date:message-id:mime-version; bh=ohoOhQ4npiWEYLwZhEciBJiVPCOqwzEzro36RMnTgCw=; b=m/Lb0t7AsdGZ0TLjc2mYz0khDzM7ihX2rKnra58FpR5HQux/SEyJKaYYfOjCc1uVOL igVFQ3HoLTDiZTkRU5Vn/tYVzlifbUlDMvdMd+L5WWozlSLIDZD9LP7HDQGXsl+qq3bW 8+8G9V/VoG7p5qmxEQJCHYBv3eAC80b1kF2939F+StowemHX8ASdwo5sbR5a+AXG9I5+ avS/7m92CDy3rH5rxwJSZj5cSENt6ckbz264GEdyzrWh4p2Vdhjq87o4mGUcsFOEJ0FV 9FMH6udjLXoeSo+kTsvo2u1GlPJoI9PLhKTH2ys9uF2iE5PUtuvHdPBX69WlrNWLXqci PkFg== X-Gm-Message-State: AElRT7EuCJQoS/ILGsg6W/3mll+MCC1NlxyspuIFDF99dq8lGJ/s3iFp oNHGIS/MmC7N0gHlzBUx2OA= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AG47ELsAFiONzgzW/bU3Tf0dYUQQBYF9NtYHysG/5h1LwxZjk+MOoRVfSGvuIGQhxR87vQDxMKNkJw== X-Received: by 10.80.220.200 with SMTP id v8mr41108223edk.49.1522097243246; Mon, 26 Mar 2018 13:47:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from devork.be ([2a02:168:581b::b89]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id o3sm10304010edi.24.2018.03.26.13.47.21 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-CHACHA20-POLY1305 bits=256/256); Mon, 26 Mar 2018 13:47:22 -0700 (PDT) Sender: Floris Bruynooghe Received: (nullmailer pid 198105 invoked by uid 469025); Mon, 26 Mar 2018 20:47:21 -0000 From: Floris Bruynooghe To: Justus Winter , David Bremner , "W. Trevor King" Cc: notmuch@notmuchmail.org Subject: Re: New Python bindings (was: Crash with Python bindings) In-Reply-To: <87po3x4tuc.fsf@thinkbox.jade-hamburg.de> References: <5694CA65.8010400@fastmail.net> <20160112102329.4269.20741@thinkbox.jade-hamburg.de> <20160112185107.GA21580@odin.tremily.us> <87k1ucp6xb.fsf@tethera.net> <87po3x4tuc.fsf@thinkbox.jade-hamburg.de> Date: Mon, 26 Mar 2018 22:47:21 +0200 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-BeenThere: notmuch@notmuchmail.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26 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: Mon, 26 Mar 2018 20:47:26 -0000 On Wed, Mar 21 2018, Justus Winter wrote: > > Floris Bruynooghe writes: > >> This is exactly what I have fixed in my alternative bindings which I >> created around the end of last year [0]. So we do have an idea of how >> to fix this, at the time I said I do believe that it's possible to also >> do this for the existing bindings even though it is a lot of work. >> After some talking between dkg and me we got to a way forward which >> proposed this, but I must admit that after messing a little with getting >> a pytest run integrated into the notmuch test-suite instead of using tox >> I lost momentum on the project and didn't advance any further. > > I'm sorry that I didn't speak up when you announced your work. I'm > actually excited about a new set of bindings for Python. I agree with > using cffi. I briefly looked at the code, and I believe it is much > nicer than what we currently have. Nice to hear, thanks! > I trust that it works fine with Python 3, does it? The version I made so far *only* works on Python 3. Mostly because it was easier, but it also allows some API niceties. > The testsuite cannot depend on pulling stuff from the net simply because > build servers typically do not have access to it. That is a hard > requirement. Sure I understand that. See another part of this thread on this though. Cheers, Floris