Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: python-yaml https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=190493 toshio@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |toshio@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ------- Additional Comments From toshio@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 2006-05-10 14:48 EST ------- Seems like we have interop issues vs upstream involvement. If whytheluckystiff isn't interested in making timely releases that address the deficiencies for non-ruby bindings that makes pysyck a lot less attractive. As you note, yaml 1.1 implementations are popping up (the ruby version is even based on pyyaml...) Are we doing python programmers a favor by implementing a yaml-1.0 parser as the only option so they have to make an incompatible update to yaml-1.1 later? There's a place for both yaml 1.0 and 1.1 libraries right now but if I'm developing a new python app with yaml support, I think pyyaml's involved upstream and Unicode support make it a better candidate. Up to you if you want to be in charge of the pyyaml package or want to work on pysyck (and from there we'll figure out if Oliver is still interested in syck or if it needs to be orphaned and somes else take over.) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. _______________________________________________ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review