On Sun, Mar 15, 2020 at 4:39 AM Ronald Oussoren <ronaldousso...@mac.com> wrote:
> AFAIK the only difference for this discussion is the “Python.app” trick, > and that can be accomplished outside of a framework build as well (but > currently is not). > > Two other differences: > - A framework build is easier to integrate into applications that are > built using Xcode (just drop the framework into list of used frameworks) > When would that come into play? If you are developing an application that embeds the python interpreter? OR if you are using XCode as your IDE for developing a Python App? > - py2app currently doesn’t work properly with a Unix build > But that could be fixed, yes? (And I think PyInstaller already does work with a unix build) I *think* this means that a unix-style build with the python.app "trick" would be appropriate for use in distributions that are otherwise not "mac native" -- e.g. conda, homebrew. As to whether a style build would be OK for the python.org installer, I'm not so sure. That may still be a candidate for a Framework build --it sure does make installation/uninstalling easier than scatter files all over /usr/local. Of course, to make any of this happen, someone with the autoconf skills needs to have the time and motivation to do it. I'm not that person (though who knows how far I would have gotten if I'd spent the time I've spent talking about this actually giving it a try :-) ) So we'll see. Maybe there's no one that both wants this done and has the time and skills to do it -- such is the world of open source. -CHB > Ronald > > — > > Twitter: @ronaldoussoren > Blog: https://blog.ronaldoussoren.net/ -- Christopher Barker, PhD Python Language Consulting - Teaching - Scientific Software Development - Desktop GUI and Web Development - wxPython, numpy, scipy, Cython
_______________________________________________ Pythonmac-SIG maillist - Pythonmac-SIG@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pythonmac-sig unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/Pythonmac-SIG