New Python bindings

[Floris Bruynooghe]

On Wed, Mar 28 2018, Justus Winter wrote:

> Floris Bruynooghe <flub at devork.be> writes:
>
>> On Wed, Mar 21 2018, Justus Winter wrote:
>>>
>>> Floris Bruynooghe <flub at devork.be> writes:
>>>
>>>> This is exactly what I have fixed in my alternative bindings which I
>>>> created around the end of last year [0].  So we do have an idea of how
>>>> to fix this, at the time I said I do believe that it's possible to also
>>>> do this for the existing bindings even though it is a lot of work.
>>>> After some talking between dkg and me we got to a way forward which
>>>> proposed this, but I must admit that after messing a little with getting
>>>> a pytest run integrated into the notmuch test-suite instead of using tox
>>>> I lost momentum on the project and didn't advance any further.
>>>
>>> I'm sorry that I didn't speak up when you announced your work.  I'm
>>> actually excited about a new set of bindings for Python.  I agree with
>>> using cffi.  I briefly looked at the code, and I believe it is much
>>> nicer than what we currently have.
>>
>> Nice to hear, thanks!
>
> Thanks for all the work :)
>
>>> I trust that it works fine with Python 3, does it?
>>
>> The version I made so far *only* works on Python 3.  Mostly because it
>> was easier, but it also allows some API niceties.
>
> Reasonable choice.  Which versions of Python 3 are supported?  I am also
> writing bindings and I am wondering which versions to target.

Personally I consider python3.5, pypy3.5 and python3.6 the ones to
target if I have no other constraints, which was the case here.  For
upstreaming into notmuch proper there are naturally other constraints
;-)  But unless you need something specific I think 3.4 is when py3k
became the better version than 2.7, everything below that is probably
not worth it.  All IMHO obviously.

Cheers,
Floris