-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Paul Moore wrote: > 2009/4/9 Tres Seaver <tsea...@palladion.com>: >> Is there a technical reason why Windows users cannot build the >> installers themselves from "pure Python" sdists? I would rather >> distribute *no* binaries at all, myself, especially if "self-help" >> works. Stuff which requires a compiler is obviously a barrier for many >> Windows users: such packages normally need a Windows-savvy contributor >> to do the installer build, which often lags the 'sdist' release by a >> noticeable period. > > No technical reason, no. It's as simple as "python setup.py > bdist_wininst" or "python setup.py mdist_msi". Personally, I'm happy > doing that for any pure python package that doesn't provide an > installer. > > The only downside is that not all packages document whether they are > pure Python. It can be frustrating to download a package, unpack it, > and try to build it only to find out that it has C code that won't > build. Or even more subtle, it builds fine, but ignores important > speedup code written in C... > > But the main reason is social - Windows users expect to download > installers, and have a low tolerance for projects that don't provide > such. And a low tolerance for anything involving a command line, in > many cases. Call us bone idle if you must, but it's a fact you need to > deal with in considering a Windows audience.
*Shrug*. I mostly don't care about donating extra effort to help users who refuse to help themselves, or to contribute to the product. *That* isn't going to change, either. I've been willing to make exceptoins in the past for "crucial" packages with C extensions, but anything that requires booting to Windows is mostly not going to happen. > However, it's equally true (I believe) that "python setup.py > bdist_wininst" works fine on a Linux box. So it's not as if building > Windows installers is a huge chore for developers, either. (I accept > that there are other tasks, like distribution). It's a trade-off of > developer time vs user time (and I fully accept that this trade-off > comes out differently in an open source/volunteer environment). I don't think that works: $ ../../bin/python setup.py bdist_wininst running bdist_wininst running build installing to build/bdist.linux-i686/wininst running install_egg_info running egg_info writing pkginfo.egg-info/PKG-INFO writing top-level names to pkginfo.egg-info/top_level.txt writing dependency_links to pkginfo.egg-info/dependency_links.txt reading manifest file 'pkginfo.egg-info/SOURCES.txt' writing manifest file 'pkginfo.egg-info/SOURCES.txt' Copying pkginfo.egg-info to build/bdist.linux-i686/wininst/PURELIB/pkginfo-0.1-py2.6.egg-info running install_scripts creating '/tmp/tmpJ5kgq8.zip' and adding '.' to it adding 'PURELIB/pkginfo-0.1-py2.6.egg-info/dependency_links.txt' adding 'PURELIB/pkginfo-0.1-py2.6.egg-info/SOURCES.txt' adding 'PURELIB/pkginfo-0.1-py2.6.egg-info/top_level.txt' adding 'PURELIB/pkginfo-0.1-py2.6.egg-info/PKG-INFO' creating dist Warning: Can't read registry to find the necessary compiler setting Make sure that Python modules _winreg, win32api or win32con are installed. error: /home/tseaver/projects/Zope-CVS/lib/python2.6/distutils/command/wininst-6.0ux-i686.exe: No such file or directory Note that this package is pure python. Tres. - -- =================================================================== Tres Seaver +1 540-429-0999 tsea...@palladion.com Palladion Software "Excellence by Design" http://palladion.com -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFJ3lRf+gerLs4ltQ4RAjwkAJ4kSb++3dwISpZWoFTWy3ymPfHdMACeMZ42 BzuguG6IxSvFV4Q8Lvh8I98= =dbEz -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ Distutils-SIG maillist - Distutils-SIG@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig
