Message247420
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. |
|
Date |
User |
Action |
Args |
2015-07-26 10:18:45 | ronaldoussoren | set | recipients:
+ ronaldoussoren, ned.deily, Jim Zajkowski |
2015-07-26 10:18:45 | ronaldoussoren | set | messageid: <1437905925.42.0.462132648155.issue24502@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
2015-07-26 10:18:45 | ronaldoussoren | link | issue24502 messages |
2015-07-26 10:18:44 | ronaldoussoren | create | |
|