Currernt config hook implementation scales very badly

[Oliver Grawert]

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
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 181 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/snapcraft/attachments/20170202/37ab3180/attachment.sig>