> Sadly a python networking library was not selected. But it sounds like
> random people will be working on this for themselves in the medium time
> frame. Also, thanks to the discussion on pygame-users, I think we have a
> clearer idea of what this module might look like.
I am definitely going to work on my proposal in my spare time. I'll post to
the list when I have some working code - hopefully by next weekend. David
Keeney has expressed interest in helping. I'm interested to know who else
plans on going ahead with their proposal. I would like to muck around a bit
with my own implementation to get a better understanding of the issues, but
if someone comes out with a better implementation I will start contributing
to that instead.
Here's my proposal:
http://www.mumstudents.org/~bda/soc/NetworkingForPygame.html
I plan on focusing on a TCP remote events protocol. TCP will allow me to focus
on issues of integrating with pygame, rather then how to add optional
delivery confirmation, in order packets, and handle firewall issues on top of
UDP. Once it's working with TCP, I'll start work on UDP.
Some thoughts on using a separate thread:
If events are posted from the network thread, the events will be handled in
the main thread and won't complicate game code. So in that use case, using a
network thread will complicate the network module, but will not make it any
more difficult to develop a networked game.
-Bryce Allen