Re: [Pythonmac-SIG] Marking the pre-built extensions as Intel-capable...
On 28-mrt-2006, at 1:18, Bob Ippolito wrote: On Mar 27, 2006, at 2:55 PM, Christopher Barker wrote: Bob Ippolito wrote: That whole section really needs to be restructured to address the common questions and issues people have regarding finding the right packages for them. great idea. I think I'd like to turn http://pythonmac.org/ packages/ into just a launch pad for finding a list of packages for the Python that you're interested in. Do you mean that it wouldn't actually host them for download there? No, I mean that that URL won't directly list any packages. It'll be a listing of package lists and enough information to direct a newish user to the right list. Please no. I think it is a VERY good idea to have a collection there for download. Pretty soon, I think we'll be able to call the 2.4.3 Universal build the officially recommended build, and we can have a collection of packages there for it. I now I'll contribute a few, and I'm sure others will as well. One question is: should they be eggs or traditional *.mpkgs? I'd certainly prefer eggs where possible, but transitionally we're definitely going to need *.mpkgs. Maybe both for now, and/or separate pages for .mpkgs and binary eggs? For casual users it is easier to install mpkgs, hence we'll need mpkgs until someone writes the tool that allows one to double-click on eggs to install them. I'm tempted to do so myself just to avoid packaging stuff twice :-) Mpkgs have another advantage: they allow you to include documentation and examples into the package. None of the existing packages on pythonmac.org (except for pyobjc and possibly py2app) actually use this possibility, therefore I'd say this is not a very important advantage. Ronald ___ Pythonmac-SIG maillist - Pythonmac-SIG@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pythonmac-sig
Re: [Pythonmac-SIG] Marking the pre-built extensions as Intel-capable...
Ronald Oussoren wrote: Before anyone starts coding, what should happen when you double-click on an egg? I'd say this should bring up a dialog that allows you to install the egg and possibly set some options. Installation will be done using easy_install. That sounds good to me. Does easy-install come with the new Universal build package? Or is a good first step to make a package out of that? I'd like to start populating the world with Universal packages. I see a couple possible routes: 1) wait for Bob to finish Py2App (bdist_mpkg): I think he's indicated he's hoping to get that done this weekend. 2) build *.eggs, and hope someone comes up with a app to associate them with later. (and it the meantime they can be installed with the command line easy-install 3) just build them for myself, and wait until this settles out some more. Maybe start a Wiki page with a list of packages and an indication of what was needed to do to build them. -Chris --- Christopher Barker, Ph.D. Oceanographer NOAA/ORR/HAZMAT (206) 526-6959 voice 7600 Sand Point Way NE (206) 526-6329 fax Seattle, WA 98115 (206) 526-6317 main reception [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Pythonmac-SIG maillist - Pythonmac-SIG@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pythonmac-sig
Re: [Pythonmac-SIG] Marking the pre-built extensions as Intel-capable...
Ronald Oussoren wrote: For casual users it is easier to install mpkgs, hence we'll need mpkgs until someone writes the tool that allows one to double-click on eggs to install them. I'm tempted to do so myself just to avoid packaging stuff twice :-) Mpkgs have another advantage: they allow you to include documentation and examples into the package. None of the existing packages on pythonmac.org (except for pyobjc and possibly py2app) actually use this possibility, therefore I'd say this is not a very important advantage. Doesn't the wxPython package? Anyway, another advantage of eggs is that they can be versioned, so that users can have different versions of a package installed at once. Couldn't we put a *.egg into a *.mpkg? and get the best of both worlds? -Chris -- Christopher Barker, Ph.D. Oceanographer NOAA/ORR/HAZMAT (206) 526-6959 voice 7600 Sand Point Way NE (206) 526-6329 fax Seattle, WA 98115 (206) 526-6317 main reception [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Pythonmac-SIG maillist - Pythonmac-SIG@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pythonmac-sig
Re: [Pythonmac-SIG] Marking the pre-built extensions as Intel-capable...
On 28-mrt-2006, at 18:26, Christopher Barker wrote: Ronald Oussoren wrote: For casual users it is easier to install mpkgs, hence we'll need mpkgs until someone writes the tool that allows one to double-click on eggs to install them. I'm tempted to do so myself just to avoid packaging stuff twice :-) Mpkgs have another advantage: they allow you to include documentation and examples into the package. None of the existing packages on pythonmac.org (except for pyobjc and possibly py2app) actually use this possibility, therefore I'd say this is not a very important advantage. Doesn't the wxPython package? Anyway, another advantage of eggs is that they can be versioned, so that users can have different versions of a package installed at once. Couldn't we put a *.egg into a *.mpkg? and get the best of both worlds? There's currently two ways to easily build redistributable packages for OSX: the oldest is bdist_mpkg, the newer is bdist_egg. bdist_mpkg is/was part of py2app and includes a script that allows you to build a .mpkg for every python package that includes a setup.py script. bdist_egg is part of setuptools and AFAIK doesn't include a tool for building eggs for python packages that don't support it, but there is an easy way to build them. There is not yet an easy way to place an egg into a .mpkg, although Bob has indicated that he wants to restructure bdist_mpkg to to this. Ronald -Chris -- Christopher Barker, Ph.D. Oceanographer NOAA/ORR/HAZMAT (206) 526-6959 voice 7600 Sand Point Way NE (206) 526-6329 fax Seattle, WA 98115 (206) 526-6317 main reception [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Pythonmac-SIG maillist - Pythonmac-SIG@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pythonmac-sig ___ Pythonmac-SIG maillist - Pythonmac-SIG@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pythonmac-sig
Re: [Pythonmac-SIG] Marking the pre-built extensions as Intel-capable...
Couldn't we put a *.egg into a *.mpkg? and get the best of both worlds? That would be my vote. Bill ___ Pythonmac-SIG maillist - Pythonmac-SIG@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pythonmac-sig
Re: [Pythonmac-SIG] Marking the pre-built extensions as Intel-capable...
On Mar 27, 2006, at 11:36 AM, Bill Janssen wrote: I'm looking over the downloads page again, thinking about what we need to do to support the Universal builds. First off, the discussion last week about which packages will work with it seems very important. Who's got edit access to pythonmac.org? Just me, but I'm willing to dole out access to anyone who will commit to doing something with those privileges :) Could someone please put a note on http://pythonmac.org/packages/ to say that the packages listed there are all PPC-only? Done And do we need a new section for 10.4.2-capable packages, maybe with a stamp that marks those that are Intel-capable? That whole section really needs to be restructured to address the common questions and issues people have regarding finding the right packages for them. I think I'd like to turn http://pythonmac.org/ packages/ into just a launch pad for finding a list of packages for the Python that you're interested in. -bob ___ Pythonmac-SIG maillist - Pythonmac-SIG@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pythonmac-sig
Re: [Pythonmac-SIG] Marking the pre-built extensions as Intel-capable...
Bob Ippolito wrote: No, I mean that that URL won't directly list any packages. It'll be a listing of package lists and enough information to direct a newish user to the right list. Then yes, that's a great idea. I am, as we e-speak, reworking those pages with a different structure now. I'm no web designer, but it should give us something that someone can make prettieer if they want. I'd certainly prefer eggs where possible, but transitionally we're definitely going to need *.mpkgs. Maybe both for now, and/or separate pages for .mpkgs and binary eggs? What happens if you double-click on a *.egg? I like that anyone with OS-X can figure out how to install from a *.mpkg -Chris -- Christopher Barker, Ph.D. Oceanographer NOAA/ORR/HAZMAT (206) 526-6959 voice 7600 Sand Point Way NE (206) 526-6329 fax Seattle, WA 98115 (206) 526-6317 main reception [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Pythonmac-SIG maillist - Pythonmac-SIG@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pythonmac-sig
Re: [Pythonmac-SIG] Marking the pre-built extensions as Intel-capable...
On Mon, Mar 27, 2006 at 04:00:07PM -0800, Christopher Barker wrote: What happens if you double-click on a *.egg? That'd be an incredibly cool utility to have, and a lot easier to write than something like PackageManager. -- Nicholas Riley [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://www.uiuc.edu/ph/www/njriley ___ Pythonmac-SIG maillist - Pythonmac-SIG@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pythonmac-sig
Re: [Pythonmac-SIG] Marking the pre-built extensions as Intel-capable...
Could someone please put a note on http://pythonmac.org/packages/ to say that the packages listed there are all PPC-only? Done Looks good, thanks. Bill ___ Pythonmac-SIG maillist - Pythonmac-SIG@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pythonmac-sig
Re: [Pythonmac-SIG] Marking the pre-built extensions as Intel-capable...
I'd certainly prefer eggs where possible, but transitionally we're definitely going to need *.mpkgs. Maybe both for now, and/or separate pages for .mpkgs and binary eggs? What happens if you double-click on a *.egg? I like that anyone with OS-X can figure out how to install from a *.mpkg Without any experience with eggs (I believe that they are another Phillip Eby brainstorm?), can I suggest that a standard command-line way of simply wrapping an egg as an mpkg would be a good thing to have? That way, contributors could just build eggs, and the website could serve up either a raw egg or a wrapped egg as an mpkg. Is there a specification for the egg format? Bill ___ Pythonmac-SIG maillist - Pythonmac-SIG@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pythonmac-sig
Re: [Pythonmac-SIG] Marking the pre-built extensions as Intel-capable...
On Mar 27, 2006, at 4:57 PM, Christopher Barker wrote: Christopher Barker wrote: Then yes, that's a great idea. I am, as we e-speak, reworking those pages with a different structure now. I'm no web designer, but it should give us something that someone can make prettier if they want. First I added a link to the packages page at the top of the main pythonmac.org page. I've enclosed a simple rearrangement of the pythonmac.org/packages page. What I've done is create a separate page for each supported build. As the packages built for 10.3 will also work on 10.4, I double listed them, so that a 10.4 user could just go to that page, and see everything that they can use. I also put a link in to download the python builds themselves, why not be able to get it all from one place? Ultimately, we really should have some little semi-automated tool that would make it easy to add a new package to the list, updated the page. For now, doing by hand is not too big a deal, and I don't' want to mess with tools before we settle on a page layout. The pages are enclosed as a zip file. Ii hope anyone who is interested will give feedback. Cool, I'll take a look at this probably tomorrow. The package list is currently automated using a dumb little script.. check this: # the input data http://pythonmac.org/packages/packages.txt # the script http://undefined.org/python/packages.py.txt -bob ___ Pythonmac-SIG maillist - Pythonmac-SIG@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pythonmac-sig
Re: [Pythonmac-SIG] Marking the pre-built extensions as Intel-capable...
On Mar 27, 2006, at 4:00 PM, Christopher Barker wrote: Bob Ippolito wrote: No, I mean that that URL won't directly list any packages. It'll be a listing of package lists and enough information to direct a newish user to the right list. Then yes, that's a great idea. I am, as we e-speak, reworking those pages with a different structure now. I'm no web designer, but it should give us something that someone can make prettieer if they want. I'd certainly prefer eggs where possible, but transitionally we're definitely going to need *.mpkgs. Maybe both for now, and/or separate pages for .mpkgs and binary eggs? What happens if you double-click on a *.egg? Nothing yet, but it wouldn't be that hard to make a little app that associates itself with .egg I like that anyone with OS-X can figure out how to install from a *.mpkg Sure. Ideally bdist_mpkg will produce *.mpkg installers that just contain eggs (for bootstrapping maybe), but that's not currently the case. -bob ___ Pythonmac-SIG maillist - Pythonmac-SIG@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pythonmac-sig
Re: [Pythonmac-SIG] Marking the pre-built extensions as Intel-capable...
On Mar 27, 2006, at 5:13 PM, Bill Janssen wrote: I'd certainly prefer eggs where possible, but transitionally we're definitely going to need *.mpkgs. Maybe both for now, and/or separate pages for .mpkgs and binary eggs? What happens if you double-click on a *.egg? I like that anyone with OS-X can figure out how to install from a *.mpkg Without any experience with eggs (I believe that they are another Phillip Eby brainstorm?), can I suggest that a standard command-line way of simply wrapping an egg as an mpkg would be a good thing to have? That way, contributors could just build eggs, and the website could serve up either a raw egg or a wrapped egg as an mpkg. Is there a specification for the egg format? http://peak.telecommunity.com/DevCenter/PythonEggs http://peak.telecommunity.com/DevCenter/EasyInstall http://peak.telecommunity.com/DevCenter/PkgResources http://peak.telecommunity.com/DevCenter/setuptools -bob ___ Pythonmac-SIG maillist - Pythonmac-SIG@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pythonmac-sig
Re: [Pythonmac-SIG] Marking the pre-built extensions as Intel-capable...
Without any experience with eggs (I believe that they are another Phillip Eby brainstorm?), can I suggest that a standard command-line Yep, they are. Is there a specification for the egg format? http://peak.telecommunity.com/DevCenter/PythonEggs They're zipfiles containing additional metadata, though it's hard to find all details and formalspecs on the site... Alex ___ Pythonmac-SIG maillist - Pythonmac-SIG@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pythonmac-sig
Re: [Pythonmac-SIG] Marking the pre-built extensions as Intel-capable...
On 28-mrt-2006, at 3:01, Nicholas Riley wrote: On Mon, Mar 27, 2006 at 04:00:07PM -0800, Christopher Barker wrote: What happens if you double-click on a *.egg? That'd be an incredibly cool utility to have, and a lot easier to write than something like PackageManager. Before anyone starts coding, what should happen when you double-click on an egg? I'd say this should bring up a dialog that allows you to install the egg and possibly set some options. Installation will be done using easy_install. Ronald -- Nicholas Riley [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://www.uiuc.edu/ph/www/ njriley ___ Pythonmac-SIG maillist - Pythonmac-SIG@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pythonmac-sig ___ Pythonmac-SIG maillist - Pythonmac-SIG@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pythonmac-sig
