Hi Daniel:
You're definitely more on top of the rules and regulations than I am, so
I'll trust your judgement. python-pyatspi seems like it would get the
highest number of hits for various search strings using Synaptic.
Will
On Tue, 2007-06-12 at 15:57 +0200, Daniel Holbach wrote:
> Hello Will
Hello William,
Am Dienstag, den 12.06.2007, 09:14 -0400 schrieb Willie Walker:
> I say sticking with something that matches given patterns and names
> might be a good thing. How about just pyatspi? Maybe just including it
> with libatspi and not making it a separate package would be another
> al
Hello Willie,
thanks for the quick reply.
Am Dienstag, den 12.06.2007, 07:42 -0400 schrieb Willie Walker:
> http://live.gnome.org/GAP/PythonATSPI gives more information on these
> bindings. A big difference between pyatspi and pyspi is that pyspi
> requires the AT-SPI cspi layer (potentially to
Hi Daniel:
> Am Dienstag, den 12.06.2007, 07:42 -0400 schrieb Willie Walker:
> > http://live.gnome.org/GAP/PythonATSPI gives more information on these
> > bindings. A big difference between pyatspi and pyspi is that pyspi
> > requires the AT-SPI cspi layer (potentially to be deprecated) whereas
>
Hi:
http://live.gnome.org/GAP/PythonATSPI gives more information on these
bindings. A big difference between pyatspi and pyspi is that pyspi
requires the AT-SPI cspi layer (potentially to be deprecated) whereas
pyatspi doesn't.
Hope this helps,
Will
On Tue, 2007-06-12 at 11:55 +0200, Daniel
Hello everybody,
I wondered about the recent addition of pyatspi to the at-spi 1.19.3
release.
How does it relate to pyspi (that's the source that ships the
python-at-spi package in Ubuntu).
Is there any convergence planned between the two python bindings
planned?
Just trying to find out what
