hi, Am Donnerstag, den 02.02.2017, 10:16 +0000 schrieb Mark Shuttleworth: > > > Really? I thought Python was an excellent choice, and built and > > staged all my wrappers as a Python part. 'core' already has > > Python3, so it isn't bloating the snap size. And it makes it a > > doddle to manipulate json, yaml or ini files, when this sort of > > thing requires an expert to do correctly in bash or dash. > > > > (but look at 'jq' if you insist on shell scripts - it seemed very > > helpful for dealing with json) > > I would strongly +1 python3 from the core snap for general hook > authorship. It's always there, it's perfectly fast for one-time > operations, it's comfortable for text handling, it's architecture- > independent with small files. >
just as a side note, this works for all basic python stuff
(wrappers/config etc), but not if you use any complex modules.
in that case you should indeed ship python in your snap using a python
plugin in snapcraft.yaml and include the necessary modules in your
snap.
ciao
oli
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
-- Snapcraft mailing list Snapcraft@lists.snapcraft.io Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/snapcraft
