There are a handful of attributes pygobject exposes using Pythons double underscore followed by double underscore naming convention (__<name>__). This naming scheme is reserved for Python operators and should not be used to avoid potential future clashes with Python. I recall reading in Python docs that this naming scheme should not be used in client code but can't seem to find a reference ATM. I was able to find an article which states the same thing though:

http://www.pixelmonkey.org/2013/04/11/python-double-under-double-wonder 

"Never, ever, invent your own dunders — Python leaves you with a number of clean namespaces (classes, modules, etc.) for your own code. Use them! The core Python team reserved a somewhat ugly namespace for themselves — don’t trample all over their compromise by stealing their names."

Here's an initial list:

  __gtype__
  __gtype_name__
  __gpointer__
  __gproperties__
  __gsignals__
  __info__

The one that sticks out the most is __info__ as it is such a generic name. Replacing the naming with a single prefixed underscore should be sufficient to avoid clashes with GI library names (which is the purpose of the special naming to begin with):

  _gtype
  _gtypename
  _gpointer
  _gproperties
  _gsignals
  _ginfo

Alternatively we could use a single underscore followed by single underscore: _gtype_, _ginfo_, etc...

__gproperties__ and __gsignals__ could probably be deprecated completely because we have Property and Signal descriptors which are cleaner anyhow.