On Jun 5, 2005, at 9:24 PM, Nick Matsakis wrote:
>
> On Sun, 5 Jun 2005, Ronald Oussoren wrote:
>
>
>>> That's the same as saying "someone who does some work can do more
>>> work". Why should this person do more work when they don't have to?
>>> Why don't we just take the half-cent worth of disk
On Sun, 5 Jun 2005, Ronald Oussoren wrote:
> > That's the same as saying "someone who does some work can do more
> > work". Why should this person do more work when they don't have to?
> > Why don't we just take the half-cent worth of disk space and install
> > the 2.4 binaries while we're there?
On 3-jun-2005, at 15:22, Nick Matsakis wrote:
>
> On Fri, 3 Jun 2005, Ronald Oussoren wrote:
>
>
>> I don't think that's worth the effort. Someone who goes through the
>> effort of downloading a python 2.4.1 can also download a seperate
>> installer for appscript-for-python2.4 (and every other pa
On Jun 3, 2005, at 3:30 PM, has wrote:
> Bob Ippolito wrote:
>
>
>> There are three situations you should be concerned with:
>> 1. Python 2.3.0 on Mac OS X 10.3
>> 2. Python 2.3.5 on Mac OS X 10.4
>> 3. Python 2.4.x on either
>>
>> 1 and 2 can be dealt with by a single package, built on Mac OS X
On Jun 3, 2005, at 3:22 PM, Nick Matsakis wrote:
>
> On Fri, 3 Jun 2005, Ronald Oussoren wrote:
>
>
>> I don't think that's worth the effort. Someone who goes through the
>> effort of downloading a python 2.4.1 can also download a seperate
>> installer for appscript-for-python2.4 (and every other
On Jun 3, 2005, at 3:20 PM, Nick Matsakis wrote:
>
> On Fri, 3 Jun 2005, Bob Ippolito wrote:
>
>
>> Python extensions/packages don't and can't currently do things the
>> Mac way, trying to shoehorn it into the Mac way before it's ready
>> just causes unnecessary hassle for the developer and the u
Bob Ippolito wrote:
>There are three situations you should be concerned with:
>1. Python 2.3.0 on Mac OS X 10.3
>2. Python 2.3.5 on Mac OS X 10.4
>3. Python 2.4.x on either
>
>1 and 2 can be dealt with by a single package, built on Mac OS X 10.3
>with bdist_mpkg installed for Python 2.3.0
>
>3 ca
On Fri, 3 Jun 2005, Ronald Oussoren wrote:
> I don't think that's worth the effort. Someone who goes through the
> effort of downloading a python 2.4.1 can also download a seperate
> installer for appscript-for-python2.4 (and every other package they like
> to use with python 2.4).
That's the sa
On Fri, 3 Jun 2005, Bob Ippolito wrote:
> Python extensions/packages don't and can't currently do things the
> Mac way, trying to shoehorn it into the Mac way before it's ready
> just causes unnecessary hassle for the developer and the user. You
> should just do it the way that everyone else doe
On Jun 3, 2005, at 2:30 PM, Ronald Oussoren wrote:
>
> On 3-jun-2005, at 23:02, Bob Ippolito wrote:
>
>> I can effectively guarantee that any Python 2.3.x packages are going
>> to break on Mac OS X 10.5,
>>
>
> Why are you so sure Py2.3 packages will break on OS X 10.5? Is it that
> 10.5 is so lo
On 3-jun-2005, at 21:12, Nick Matsakis wrote:
> I was also thinking it might be nice if Python
> 2.4.1 could be installed after appscript and it would "just work"
> without
> any additional effort.
I don't think that's worth the effort. Someone who goes through the
effort
of downloading a p
On 3-jun-2005, at 23:02, Bob Ippolito wrote:
>
> I can effectively guarantee that any Python 2.3.x packages are going
> to break on Mac OS X 10.5,
Why are you so sure Py2.3 packages will break on OS X 10.5? Is it that
10.5 is so long away that Py2.3 will no longer be supported by the
python.org
On Jun 3, 2005, at 12:12 PM, Nick Matsakis wrote:
>
> On Thu, 2 Jun 2005, Bob Ippolito wrote:
>
>
>> An installer, as built by bdist_mpkg, won't install anything unless
>> Python is where it expects it to be. Thus, it's not possible to
>> install into a framework that doesn't exist.
>
> Here's t
On Thu, 2 Jun 2005, Bob Ippolito wrote:
> An installer, as built by bdist_mpkg, won't install anything unless
> Python is where it expects it to be. Thus, it's not possible to
> install into a framework that doesn't exist.
Here's the experience that I was hoping for: User installs appscript
bin
On Jun 3, 2005, at 2:37 AM, has wrote:
> Bob Ippolito wrote:
>
>
>> An installer, as built by bdist_mpkg, won't install anything unless
>> Python is where it expects it to be. Thus, it's not possible to
>> install into a framework that doesn't exist.
>>
>
> Interjecting a moment, the appscript i
Bob Ippolito wrote:
>An installer, as built by bdist_mpkg, won't install anything unless
>Python is where it expects it to be. Thus, it's not possible to
>install into a framework that doesn't exist.
Interjecting a moment, the appscript installer needs to carry both 2.3 and 2.4
versions of ha
On Jun 2, 2005, at 11:19 PM, Nick Matsakis wrote:
>
> On Thu, 2 Jun 2005, Bob Ippolito wrote:
>
>
>> MacPython 2.4.1 looks in the site-packages directory embedded in its
>> framework. There is only one supported framework location (/Library/
>> Frameworks), so there's no need to care about alter
On Thu, 2 Jun 2005, Bob Ippolito wrote:
> MacPython 2.4.1 looks in the site-packages directory embedded in its
> framework. There is only one supported framework location (/Library/
> Frameworks), so there's no need to care about alternatives.
Frameworks can also appear in application bundles t
On Jun 2, 2005, at 10:02 PM, Nick Matsakis wrote:
>
> On Thu, 2 Jun 2005, Nick Matsakis wrote:
>
>
>> Finally, on the matter of Python 2.4, is there a standard place
>> that the
>> macpython 2.4.1 looks for packages? /Library/Python/2.4/site-
>> packages,
>> perhaps?
>>
>
> So, my understandi
On Thu, 2 Jun 2005, Nick Matsakis wrote:
> Finally, on the matter of Python 2.4, is there a standard place that the
> macpython 2.4.1 looks for packages? /Library/Python/2.4/site-packages,
> perhaps?
So, my understanding is that independent framework builds of macpython
default to only looking
HAS and I are working on a new version of the appscript binary installer.
An alpha version of the installer can be found at:
http://appscript.ai.mit.edu/appscript-1.1a1.dmg
Changes from Appscript Installer 1.0.x include:
- Changed installation location to be compatible with 10.4 python
in
21 matches
Mail list logo
