Author ronaldoussoren
Recipients Jim Zajkowski, ned.deily, ronaldoussoren
Date 2015-07-26.10:18:44
SpamBayes Score -1.0
Marked as misclassified Yes
Message-id <1437905925.42.0.462132648155.issue24502@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
In-reply-to
Content
What's your plan for installers for Py3.6?

In a world where backward compatibility is not an issue I'd definitely advocate trying to move to some kind off .app as the installation.

That is: have a {SomeName}.app that contains the entire Python installation. Arguably SomeName could be IDLE, but it could also be a new custom GUI that does "stuff".  There'd obviously also need to be a documented way to get to the actual sys.prefix from the command-line.

The advantage of this is that users don't have to use on an installer at all, just drop {SomeName}.app in the filesystem and use it.

Getting this to work might be quite a lot of work though, the current binaries are not linked in such a way that this is possible and pyvenv also complicates things.

A major disadvantage is that this likely breaks at least some users workflow.
History
Date User Action Args
2015-07-26 10:18:45ronaldoussorensetrecipients: + ronaldoussoren, ned.deily, Jim Zajkowski
2015-07-26 10:18:45ronaldoussorensetmessageid: <1437905925.42.0.462132648155.issue24502@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
2015-07-26 10:18:45ronaldoussorenlinkissue24502 messages
2015-07-26 10:18:44ronaldoussorencreate