[sugar] [pyxpcom] PyXPCOM viability and OLPC

[edward baafi]

On 5/9/07, Marco Pesenti Gritti <mpg at redhat.com> wrote:
> Nothing particular no. I'm pretty sure you will get the same issue if
> you try to build trunk.
>

Ok.. given the time constraints and the fact that you're aiming for
embedding and aren't going to use xul widgets, why don't you use one
of the 1.8 branches and do a pyxpcom build?  As far as I know, the
only thing 1.9 (Trunk) gets you in terms of python is python/dom which
would be useful if you wanted to use xul widgets and script the UI in
python... Even if you wanted to try the xul widgets idea (with the tie
in to sugar), I think I remember a patch to build the 1.8 branches
with python/dom (I might be wrong)..

On 5/9/07, Steve Lee <steve at fullmeasure.co.uk> wrote:

> Standalone is interesting. Can pyxpcom readily exist outside a Mozilla
> build? If so what does that mean? Just the XPCOM framework and no
> Mozilla components?

yes.  you get the components necessary to launch xpcom services and
not much else..

> Would it be possible to add XUL widgets and XPCOM services to another
> python project via pyXPCOM. more or less treating it as a framework
> like wxWidgets?

I personally don't know anyone who's used it like this but I guess
it's possible in theory (but you still have to build all the necessary
components).. For me, xulrunner handles all the magic necessary to
bootstrap my applications so I have no idea how you'd approach this...