I vote for .dmg for the OSX version. See Firefox for how easy installation can be:
http://www.mozilla.com/en-US/products/download.html?product=firefox-3.6.6&os=osx〈=en-US Different topic - would love to see Blender package its libraries on Linux the way it does for OSX. Would make life easier for shared cluster use where installing libraries could break other researcher's apps. Thanks, Scott Message: 7 Date: Wed, 14 Jul 2010 09:04:22 -0500 From: Mike Belanger <mikejamesbelan...@gmail.com> Subject: Re: [Bf-committers] Blender 2.5x beta status To: bf-blender developers <bf-committers@blender.org> Message-ID: <aanlktilxxu6ojphqyexw0mn8ipmpyazonwjjkaalf...@mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-2 'If you are a real mac user, you use .dmg images very often, since it's the way most apps do it, so why should this be confusing?' If your ANY kind of real computer user, you've probably decompressed a .zip file before. On another note, PackageMaker.app *may* provide an easier installation, as it chooses the directory for the user, and it might be possible for it to check the environment, ie what version of python, for the user. However, its an extra step for builders, and takes quite a while to package blender on my machine. 2010/7/14 Luke Frisken <l.fris...@gmail.com> > There's really not much point trying to use something as complicated > in computer usage terms as blender if one can't cope with the > installation how it is now. > > On 7/14/10, Vilem Novak <pildano...@post.cz> wrote: > > If you are a real mac user, you use .dmg images very often, > > since it's the way most apps do it, so why should this be confusing? > > I guess I would rather be confused by a zip on mac. > > as said, it takes the same amount of clicks. > > So, my voice is for .dmg > > _______________________________________________ Bf-committers mailing list Bf-committers@blender.org http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers