Torsten Bronger wrote:
> Has Wax exceeded the critical mass so that one can be quite certain > that it will still be maintained, say, next year? (Sincere question > since I don't know.) I was a bit worried about this myself, but after browsing the source I have to say I'm not terribly so anymore. It's a relatively thin wrapper over wxPython so you are *almost* using wxPython, but w/o a lot of the pain & horror, and if Hans Nowak stopped paying attention to it the maintenance tab could be picked up by someone else rather easily. Also, wxPython 2.6 is a relatively recent arrival and it's supported, so the next "breakage point" is relatively far away. Frankly, I think the time saved by coding for Wax could even exceed the hypothetical time wasted (in case Wax were discontinued) porting a finished Wax-using product over to use straight wxPython. Using Wax (and occasionally peeking at the source) also seems to be a nice way to learn straight wxPython without being immersed in all the grossness at once. ;-) -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
