On Mon, Feb 13, 2006 at 09:06:06AM -0800, Christopher Barker wrote:
> Bill Janssen wrote:
> > You missed the first part of my message, I think. The system version
> > would be installed under /usr/libexec/, or some such place, not under
> > /usr/bin/.
>
> That is a good idea, but how do we get Ap
Bill Janssen wrote:
> You missed the first part of my message, I think. The system version
> would be installed under /usr/libexec/, or some such place, not under
> /usr/bin/.
That is a good idea, but how do we get Apple to do it?
> That would leave /usr/bin free for the MacPython gang to
> ins
On Feb 12, 2006, at 2:55 PM, Bill Janssen wrote:
>>> It's not really a good idea, and it certainly has near zero chance
>>> of happening -- ever. Asking Apple to move their Python
>>> interpreter is dead in the water.
>>
>> I sure hope so. /usr/bin/python has its uses.
>
> I wish someone would e
> > It's not really a good idea, and it certainly has near zero chance
> > of happening -- ever. Asking Apple to move their Python
> > interpreter is dead in the water.
>
> I sure hope so. /usr/bin/python has its uses.
I wish someone would explain to me what /usr/bin/python can do that
/usr/
On 12-feb-2006, at 20:38, Bill Janssen wrote:
The system version is installed in /usr/bin. Or do you mean we should
only support some future version where Apple doesn't place python in
/usr/bin (which I hope doesn't happen)?
Yes, that was the idea. /usr/libexec/python, or some other director
On 11-feb-2006, at 23:50, Charles Hartman wrote:
Not that I want to bundle Tcl/Tk,
--especially given the download/install overhead, right?
Mostly because my primary platform is 10.4 and I already have
installed AquaTclTk on my 10.3 test system. This makes testing the
bundled installat
On 12-feb-2006, at 20:48, Bob Ippolito wrote:
On Feb 12, 2006, at 11:38 AM, Bill Janssen wrote:
The system version is installed in /usr/bin. Or do you mean we
should
only support some future version where Apple doesn't place python in
/usr/bin (which I hope doesn't happen)?
Yes, that was
On Feb 12, 2006, at 11:38 AM, Bill Janssen wrote:
>> The system version is installed in /usr/bin. Or do you mean we should
>> only support some future version where Apple doesn't place python in
>> /usr/bin (which I hope doesn't happen)?
>
> Yes, that was the idea. /usr/libexec/python, or some o
> The system version is installed in /usr/bin. Or do you mean we should
> only support some future version where Apple doesn't place python in
> /usr/bin (which I hope doesn't happen)?
Yes, that was the idea. /usr/libexec/python, or some other directory
unlikely to be on the user's path by defaul
On 12-feb-2006, at 19:28, Bill Janssen wrote:
So you're saying that the pre-installed version could never be
really
acceptable. In that case, perhaps we only need convince Apple to
move
/usr/bin/python to some more system-y place that wouldn't usually be
on users' paths.
We then in the Ma
> > So you're saying that the pre-installed version could never be really
> > acceptable. In that case, perhaps we only need convince Apple to move
> > /usr/bin/python to some more system-y place that wouldn't usually be
> > on users' paths.
> >
> > We then in the MacPython world take the position
On Feb 11, 2006, at 2:50 PM, Charles Hartman wrote:
>
> On Feb 11, 2006, at 4:22 PM, Ronald Oussoren wrote:
>
>>
>> On 11-feb-2006, at 1:40, Charles Hartman wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> On Feb 10, 2006, at 5:31 PM, Bill Janssen wrote:
>>>
And how about bundling tcltkaqua into it, as well?
>>>
>>> Becau
On Feb 11, 2006, at 4:22 PM, Ronald Oussoren wrote:
>
> On 11-feb-2006, at 1:40, Charles Hartman wrote:
>
>>
>> On Feb 10, 2006, at 5:31 PM, Bill Janssen wrote:
>>
>>> And how about bundling tcltkaqua into it, as well?
>>
>> Because some of us, at least, have no interest in tcl. I'm not
>> clea
On 11-feb-2006, at 1:40, Charles Hartman wrote:
On Feb 10, 2006, at 5:31 PM, Bill Janssen wrote:
And how about bundling tcltkaqua into it, as well?
Because some of us, at least, have no interest in tcl. I'm not
clear whether its presence interferes with wx (thing #421 that I'm
not clea
On 11-feb-2006, at 0:37, Bill Janssen wrote:
I've put up a new page, with a slightly different address:
http://bill.janssen.org/mac/new-macpython-page.html.
I noticed you use an icon that contains a realistic picture of a
snake. Please keep in mind that lots of people are scared of snakes,
On 10-feb-2006, at 4:24, Bill Janssen wrote:
Could a Mac ever ship with an
acceptable pre-installed Python? If not, perhaps the solution for
Apple is to move /usr/bin/python to some other spot, like
/usr/libexec/, or some such place.
The issue of not being able to produce redistributable ap
On 9-feb-2006, at 22:14, Bob Ippolito wrote:
I've got a great deal of respect and appreciation for those, like Bob
and Ronald, working hard on advancing the technology pieces. Great
work, just what we all need! But unless there's some effective
delivery vehicle for getting that work to the cu
On 9-feb-2006, at 21:25, Bill Janssen wrote:
1. Link to the "Macintosh Library Module": A lot of that stuff
will be
rendered obsolete the minute Bob releases the universal build of
MacPython. PythonIDE, Package Manager, etc.: not gonna be
included. At a
minimum, you should note that this st
Bill Janssen wrote:
> > Problem with the official Mac-specific modules and documentation is
>> there's quite of stuff in there that hasn't been correct/usable since
>> OS 9. It's just that nobody's gotten around to dealing with
>> it. Experienced users already know which bits to avoid, so there's
At 11:58 AM -0800 2/10/06, Christopher Barker wrote:
>Rodney Somerstein wrote:
>>. It would be really nice to have a more basic introduction to what
>>py2app actually does.
>
>Why don't you write that, put it in the Wiki, then ask this list for
>technical review. That's what Wikis are for, and I
I've updated it to take into account Bob's comments.
http://bill.janssen.org/mac/new-macpython-page.html.
It still kind of assumes that the installers will automagically do
everything that needs doing. I assume that will be truer with the
universal installer.
Should there be a paragraph just be
On Feb 10, 2006, at 8:22 PM, Bill Janssen wrote:Though, frankly, I don't care what the trademark is, and I think people tend in real usage to use "MacOS". Well . . . not for people I know. "OSX" ["OS X"] is more common in my experience, especially among those aware that OS9 was a Mac OS.And I suspe
On Feb 10, 2006, at 5:34 PM, Bill Janssen wrote:
>>> And how about bundling tcltkaqua into it, as well?
>>
>> Because some of us, at least, have no interest in tcl. I'm not clear
>> whether its presence interferes with wx (thing #421 that I'm not
>> clear about), but it doesn't help; why should I
> The audience we're imagining is one looking to branch out a little --
> into programming, to begin with, into Python in particular.
That's *one* of the audiences.
> If that
> involves downloading something, that's perfectly familiar territory.
> If I were a Mac user interested in a new ap
> > And how about bundling tcltkaqua into it, as well?
>
> Because some of us, at least, have no interest in tcl. I'm not clear
> whether its presence interferes with wx (thing #421 that I'm not
> clear about), but it doesn't help; why should I want it on my system?
Because you can't run IDLE
> Please forget [TigerPython24Fix] exists - I'm
> tired of discussing it.
Fine. The next installer won't have it or need it, and I'll remove
the bit about it on my sample page.
> > And for that matter, why not include TigerPython23Compat as part of
> > the MacPython installer?
>
> TigerPython
> For reference:
>
> 10.0 - Cheetah
> 10.1 - Puma
> 10.2 - Jaguar
> 10.3 - Panther
> 10.4 - Jaguar
> 10.5 - Leopard
>
> Also, the trademark is "Mac OS X" not "MacOS X" or "Mac-OS/X" or
> "MACOSX" ;)
Sorry, Housecat was a (temporary) joke. I'll fix the Mac OS X refs.
Though, frankly, I don't c
> If I need a package outside of their package management system I have
> to go f*!(ing crazy figuring out which *-dev packages i need to
> install in order to get it to configure and make install correctly.
Agreed. I'd like that to be different with MacPython.
Bill
__
On Feb 10, 2006, at 5:34 PM, Bill Janssen wrote:
>> Charles Hartman wrote:
>>> It seems to me (as *much* closer to a newbie than a developer) that
>>> simply recommending the download & install of Python 2.4.x not only
>>> wouldn't put a major obstacle in the way of beginners, but wouldn't
>>> se
On Feb 10, 2006, at 5:31 PM, Bill Janssen wrote:And how about bundling tcltkaqua into it, as well? Because some of us, at least, have no interest in tcl. I'm not clear whether its presence interferes with wx (thing #421 that I'm not clear about), but it doesn't help; why should I want it on my syst
On Feb 10, 2006, at 3:37 PM, Bill Janssen wrote:
> I've put up a new page, with a slightly different address:
>
> http://bill.janssen.org/mac/new-macpython-page.html.
>
> It includes pointers to the Wiki and the FAQ, leads with the
> suggestion to upgrade, keeps the simple example, but drops the
Bill Janssen wrote:
> I don't know about that. The Mac philosophy is something like, "It
> just works". I hear that a lot from new Mac users around here.
Linux users expect it to be installed already, or come with their
distro, but don't expect it to work without tweaking config files. ;-)
Mac
I've put up a new page, with a slightly different address:
http://bill.janssen.org/mac/new-macpython-page.html.
It includes pointers to the Wiki and the FAQ, leads with the
suggestion to upgrade, keeps the simple example, but drops the use of
IDLE, and no longer points to the (seriously damaged)
> For these reasons, many
> people could benefit from upgrading their Python installation to the
> latest version from pythonmac.org. For more information, see the FAQ
> "Differences between Apple's Python and MacPython 2.4?". See also
> "What should I expect when upgrading to MacPython 2.4
On Feb 10, 2006, at 2:34 PM, Bill Janssen wrote:
>> Charles Hartman wrote:
>>> It seems to me (as *much* closer to a newbie than a developer) that
>>> simply recommending the download & install of Python 2.4.x not only
>>> wouldn't put a major obstacle in the way of beginners, but wouldn't
>>> se
On Feb 10, 2006, at 2:31 PM, Bill Janssen wrote:
>>> I agree. If the 2.4.x installer were bundled with TigerPython24Fix
>>> and some quick-start IDLE app into a single installer, that would be
>>> great, and an improvement over the current situation. (And could it
>>> please *not* have the word
> Charles Hartman wrote:
> > It seems to me (as *much* closer to a newbie than a developer) that
> > simply recommending the download & install of Python 2.4.x not only
> > wouldn't put a major obstacle in the way of beginners, but wouldn't
> > seem to, either.
>
> Exactly. It's not like an
> This would be roughly equivalent to us shipping PyObjC for Mac I guess.
Which I'd recommend.
Bill
___
Pythonmac-SIG maillist - Pythonmac-SIG@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pythonmac-sig
On Feb 10, 2006, at 2:22 PM, Bill Janssen wrote:
>> If we get them a double-clickable installer that gets them at least
>> IDLE, then they're set and they don't have to learn UNIX in the
>> process.
>
> I agree. It looks like one good thing to do would be to build an
> installer that installs
> > I agree. If the 2.4.x installer were bundled with TigerPython24Fix
> > and some quick-start IDLE app into a single installer, that would be
> > great, and an improvement over the current situation. (And could it
> > please *not* have the word "fix" in the title?)
>
> It *is* a fix, which is
Bob Ippolito wrote:
> Currently, ActivePython on Mac OS X is almost exactly the same thing
> that we're going to be shipping with the universal build of 2.4.2. The
> differences will be:
>
> 1. They aren't shipping readline, we will
This matters quite a bit, I think.
> 2. We'll probably ship
> If we get them a double-clickable installer that gets them at least
> IDLE, then they're set and they don't have to learn UNIX in the process.
I agree. It looks like one good thing to do would be to build an
installer that installs a regular App that's just a wrapper around
IDLE (and uses the
Nice, thanks!
Bill
___
Pythonmac-SIG maillist - Pythonmac-SIG@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pythonmac-sig
On Feb 10, 2006, at 1:53 PM, Bob Ippolito wrote:
>
> On Feb 10, 2006, at 1:06 PM, Kevin Walzer wrote:
>
>> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
>> Hash: SHA1
>>
>> Christopher Barker wrote:
>>> Louis Pecora wrote:
This seems to be where this argument goes: the user/newbies vs.
the
On Feb 10, 2006, at 1:06 PM, Kevin Walzer wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Christopher Barker wrote:
>> Louis Pecora wrote:
>>> This seems to be where this argument goes: the user/newbies vs. the
>>> developers.
>>
>> I don't think so. This entire conversation is abou
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Christopher Barker wrote:
> Louis Pecora wrote:
>> This seems to be where this argument goes: the user/newbies vs. the
>> developers.
>
> I don't think so. This entire conversation is about supporting the
> newbies. The disagreements are about how
Charles Hartman wrote:
> It seems to me (as *much* closer to a newbie than a developer) that
> simply recommending the download & install of Python 2.4.x not only
> wouldn't put a major obstacle in the way of beginners, but wouldn't
> seem to, either.
Exactly. It's not like anyone but Linux
Louis Pecora wrote:
> This seems to be where this argument goes: the user/newbies vs. the
> developers.
I don't think so. This entire conversation is about supporting the
newbies. The disagreements are about how best to do that.
> You shouldn't be forcing everyone to adopt a python system
> t
Rodney Somerstein wrote:
> . It would be
> really nice to have a more basic introduction to what py2app actually
> does.
Why don't you write that, put it in the Wiki, then ask this list for
technical review. That's what Wikis are for, and I think often recent
newbies are the best people to wri
On Wed, 8 Feb 2006 20:29:34 PST
Bill Janssen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I've made up a sample page, at
> http://bill.janssen.org/new-macpython-page.html.
>
> This is the kind of thing I'd like to see replace the page at
> http://www.python.org/download/download_mac.html.
>
> Bill
> ___
At 9:51 AM -0800 2/10/06, Bill Janssen wrote:
>The problem is that there are many kinds of "new users".
>
This is true. The trick, in my view, is to make sure to define terms
when they are first used. That way, the actual beginners have a
chance of following along and the more experienced "new u
Hi Bob,
On Feb 10, 2006, at 10:15 AM, Bob Ippolito wrote:
[snip]
> Do you really think that there is a large enough audience that would
> be willing to read pages of documentation, but not be willing to
> install anything?
Yes. (Though there shouldn't need to be several pages of docs.) Many
u
On Feb 10, 2006, at 10:44 AM, Bill Janssen wrote:
>>> A good entry page tries to speak usefully to all of these
>>> communities
>>> at the same time, without speaking down to any of them.
>>
>> Do you really think that there is a large enough audience that would
>> be willing to read pages of d
On Feb 10, 2006, at 10:02 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> On Feb 10, 2006, at 11:27 AM, Bob Ippolito wrote:
>
>>
>> On Feb 10, 2006, at 7:24 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> On Feb 9, 2006, at 1:32 PM, Kevin Walzer wrote:
If I'm a newbie, I'm going to go, "Huh?", then "shrug," and mo
> > A good entry page tries to speak usefully to all of these communities
> > at the same time, without speaking down to any of them.
>
> Do you really think that there is a large enough audience that would
> be willing to read pages of documentation, but not be willing to
> install anything?
On Feb 10, 2006, at 9:51 AM, Bill Janssen wrote:
>> You seem to have a good handle on what is needed to get new users
>> involved in working with Python on the Mac. Even some of the
>> questions that you list here might be a little too complex for new
>> users.
>
> The problem is that there are m
On Feb 10, 2006, at 11:27 AM, Bob Ippolito wrote:
>
> On Feb 10, 2006, at 7:24 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>>
>> On Feb 9, 2006, at 1:32 PM, Kevin Walzer wrote:
>>> If I'm a newbie, I'm going to go, "Huh?", then "shrug," and move
>>> on to
>>> Realbasic. There needs to be something double-cl
> Problem with the official Mac-specific modules and documentation is
> there's quite of stuff in there that hasn't been correct/usable since
> OS 9. It's just that nobody's gotten around to dealing with
> it. Experienced users already know which bits to avoid, so there's not
> huge impetus to clea
> You seem to have a good handle on what is needed to get new users
> involved in working with Python on the Mac. Even some of the
> questions that you list here might be a little too complex for new
> users.
The problem is that there are many kinds of "new users".
There are experienced progra
On Feb 10, 2006, at 7:24 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> On Feb 9, 2006, at 1:32 PM, Kevin Walzer wrote:
>> If I'm a newbie, I'm going to go, "Huh?", then "shrug," and move
>> on to
>> Realbasic. There needs to be something double-clickable there for a
>> newbie to use. PythonIDE, though it ha
On Feb 9, 2006, at 1:32 PM, Kevin Walzer wrote:
> If I'm a newbie, I'm going to go, "Huh?", then "shrug," and move on to
> Realbasic. There needs to be something double-clickable there for a
> newbie to use. PythonIDE, though it had many flaws, was useful this
> way.
> BTW, what happened to PyO
Bill Janssen wrote:
> > 1. Link to the "Macintosh Library Module": A lot of that stuff will be
> > rendered obsolete the minute Bob releases the universal build of
> > MacPython. PythonIDE, Package Manager, etc.: not gonna be included. At a
> > minimum, you should note that this stuff is "legacy."
It seems to me (as *much* closer to a newbie than a developer) that
simply recommending the download & install of Python 2.4.x not only
wouldn't put a major obstacle in the way of beginners, but wouldn't
seem to, either. That one step isn't a problem -- if we can get to
the point where that
Bob Ippolito wrote:
>
> The largest issue is that you can't legally redistribute the Python
> interpreter that ships with Mac OS X, so you can't create standalone
> applications. Even if you could, it wouldn't have a chance of being
> backwards compatible with the way that Apple builds thing
On Feb 9, 2006, at 8:09 PM, Rodney Somerstein wrote:
> At 1:20 PM -0800 2/9/06, Bob Ippolito wrote:
>> py2app is the solution for application packaging, and you must use
>> it with a third party Python installation (e.g. Python 2.4.1) in
>> order to come up with something that's redistributable
At 1:39 PM -0800 2/9/06, Bill Janssen wrote:
>Great idea, Rodney. I think we probably need a number of pages like
>this, kind of an FAQ set. I think the main page should just cover one
>or two things (how to run python, how to upgrade), and lots of
>pointers to these pages. Each of these should
At 1:20 PM -0800 2/9/06, Bob Ippolito wrote:
>py2app is the solution for application packaging, and you must use
>it with a third party Python installation (e.g. Python 2.4.1) in
>order to come up with something that's redistributable and robust.
>If you happen to use the system Python, then
On Feb 9, 2006, at 7:24 PM, Bill Janssen wrote:
>> Could a Mac ever ship with an
>>> acceptable pre-installed Python? If not, perhaps the solution for
>>> Apple is to move /usr/bin/python to some other spot, like
>>> /usr/libexec/, or some such place.
>>
>> The issue of not being able to produce
> Case in point. The other day I volunteered some time at the local
> elementary school and the computer teacher was looking for something to
> give to some more advanced 10 to 12 year olds. I told him that his
> Mac's all have python installed and it comes with a turtle graphics
> module. "
> Could a Mac ever ship with an
> > acceptable pre-installed Python? If not, perhaps the solution for
> > Apple is to move /usr/bin/python to some other spot, like
> > /usr/libexec/, or some such place.
>
> The issue of not being able to produce redistributable applications
> still exists, and
On Feb 9, 2006, at 1:38 PM, Bill Janssen wrote:
>> Python does not currently have an official Mac maintainer.
>
> Bingo! And no one has stepped up to document the amazing torrent of
> productive activity since Jack "retired". As a result, the useful
> pieces are scattered all over, the official
On Feb 9, 2006, at 6:56 PM, Bill Janssen wrote:
>> If we make
>> the proposed PATH change script to the installer, we can ignore the
>> system Python just as easily as we could if it wasn't there at all.
>
> It is extremely difficult (almost impossible) to make such scripts
> work properly on Unix
On Feb 9, 2006, at 4:17 PM, Kevin Ollivier wrote:
> Hi Bob,
>
> On Feb 9, 2006, at 4:10 PM, Bob Ippolito wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
>> The issue of not being able to produce redistributable applications
>> still exists, and also backwards compatibility with previous versions
>> of Mac OS X.
>
> I haven'
Hi Bob,
On Feb 9, 2006, at 4:10 PM, Bob Ippolito wrote:
[snip]
> The issue of not being able to produce redistributable applications
> still exists, and also backwards compatibility with previous versions
> of Mac OS X.
I haven't had time to respond to your other emails yet, but I've seen
you
On Feb 9, 2006, at 3:56 PM, Bill Janssen wrote:
>> If we ignore the vendor's interpreter then our documentation becomes
>> MUCH simpler as there will be one -- and preferably only one -- way
>> to do it: install a Python interpreter that is recent and can run the
>> full scope of Python applicati
> If we ignore the vendor's interpreter then our documentation becomes
> MUCH simpler as there will be one -- and preferably only one -- way
> to do it: install a Python interpreter that is recent and can run the
> full scope of Python applications.
I think I'm almost convinced on this point
> > It's the job of Fink or DarwinPorts to sustain their Python
> > communities. There are already too many choices, I'd really like to
> > avoid even more confusion.
>
> Perhaps this could be mentioned on the Bill's page to the effect that
> it's discouraged to use those sources.
Fine by m
On Feb 9, 2006, at 2:49 PM, I. Vinogradov wrote:
> On Thu, 9 Feb 2006 13:33:17 -0800
> Bob Ippolito <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> It's the job of Fink or DarwinPorts to sustain their Python
>> communities. There are already too many choices, I'd really like to
>> avoid even more confusion.
On Thu, 9 Feb 2006 13:33:17 -0800
Bob Ippolito <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> It's the job of Fink or DarwinPorts to sustain their Python
> communities. There are already too many choices, I'd really like to
> avoid even more confusion.
Perhaps this could be mentioned on the Bill's page to th
On Feb 9, 2006, at 1:39 PM, Bill Janssen wrote:
>> Now, what I really want to see added is something that explains how I
>> can write a program in Python on the Mac and create standalone
>> applications that can run on someone else's computer without them
>> having to install anything else.
>
> G
On Feb 9, 2006, at 1:48 PM, Bill Janssen wrote:
>> It is useless to me.
>
> That's what I mean by parochial.
>
> Bob, I completely understand and sympathize with what you are saying
> here. And for your purposes, these are completely legitimate
> complaints.
I'd say pragmatic, not parochial.
> It is useless to me.
That's what I mean by parochial.
Bob, I completely understand and sympathize with what you are saying
here. And for your purposes, these are completely legitimate complaints.
But there are lots of "pure Unix" programs which it works quite well
for. I do a lot of text pro
> Now, what I really want to see added is something that explains how I
> can write a program in Python on the Mac and create standalone
> applications that can run on someone else's computer without them
> having to install anything else.
Great idea, Rodney. I think we probably need a number
On Feb 9, 2006, at 12:20 PM, I. Vinogradov wrote:
> On Wed, 8 Feb 2006 20:29:34 PST
> Bill Janssen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> I've made up a sample page, at
>> http://bill.janssen.org/new-macpython-page.html.
>
> What about other sources for python2.4 such as fink and darwinports?
> Will they
On Wed, 8 Feb 2006 20:29:34 PST
Bill Janssen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I've made up a sample page, at
> http://bill.janssen.org/new-macpython-page.html.
What about other sources for python2.4 such as fink and darwinports?
Will they be frown upon or required to comply with framework
installatio
On Feb 9, 2006, at 12:09 PM, Rodney Somerstein wrote:
> At 8:29 PM -0800 2/8/06, Bill Janssen wrote:
>> I've made up a sample page, at
>> http://bill.janssen.org/new-macpython-page.html.
>>
>> This is the kind of thing I'd like to see replace the page at
>> http://www.python.org/download/download
On Feb 9, 2006, at 12:38 PM, Bill Janssen wrote:
>> Python does not currently have an official Mac maintainer.
>
> Bingo! And no one has stepped up to document the amazing torrent of
> productive activity since Jack "retired". As a result, the useful
> pieces are scattered all over, the officia
> Python does not currently have an official Mac maintainer.
Bingo! And no one has stepped up to document the amazing torrent of
productive activity since Jack "retired". As a result, the useful
pieces are scattered all over, the official documentation is wildly
out of date, and there's not even
> 1. Link to the "Macintosh Library Module": A lot of that stuff will be
> rendered obsolete the minute Bob releases the universal build of
> MacPython. PythonIDE, Package Manager, etc.: not gonna be included. At a
> minimum, you should note that this stuff is "legacy." Also, who writes
> this stuf
At 8:29 PM -0800 2/8/06, Bill Janssen wrote:
>I've made up a sample page, at
>http://bill.janssen.org/new-macpython-page.html.
>
>This is the kind of thing I'd like to see replace the page at
>http://www.python.org/download/download_mac.html.
Bill,
As the sort of somewhat sophisticated novice py
On Feb 9, 2006, at 11:55 AM, Charles Hartman wrote:
> That's exactly the kind of fix that -- together with a handful of
> others -- could make this make-over work.
>
> Incorporating the TigerPython24Fix and TigerPython23Compat patches
> would be another small, huge step. Can the 2.4 installer
That's exactly the kind of fix that -- together with a handful of
others -- could make this make-over work.
Incorporating the TigerPython24Fix and TigerPython23Compat patches
would be another small, huge step. Can the 2.4 installer look at the
system and decide which of these is needed?
The
On Feb 9, 2006, at 11:32 AM, Kevin Walzer wrote:
> 4. Maintainer: does Python on the Mac even have an official maintainer
> anymore? Has Jack Jansen resigned? Is it "maintainer-by-committee"? I
> can't help but think this is part of the reason Python seems adrift
> as a
> Mac development platfo
On Feb 9, 2006, at 10:52 AM, Bill Janssen wrote:
>> "pythonw" invokes GUI applications, "python" invokes console
>> applications. When installing an extension, I don't type "pythonw
>> setup.py install."
>
> But you could.
>
> No, my conceptual problem is just that you shouldn't need that extra
>
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Bill Janssen wrote:
> I've made up a sample page, at
> http://bill.janssen.org/new-macpython-page.html.
>
> This is the kind of thing I'd like to see replace the page at
> http://www.python.org/download/download_mac.html.
>
> Bill
>
> I fixed a couple of the problems Bob noted, and added some links to
> pictures (how to start the Terminal, and what the IDLE IDE looks
> like).
I like it.
> I'm conflicted about "pythonw". On the one hand, this works for
> everything, whereas "python" doesn't. On the other hand, why isn't
>
> "pythonw" invokes GUI applications, "python" invokes console
> applications. When installing an extension, I don't type "pythonw
> setup.py install."
But you could.
No, my conceptual problem is just that you shouldn't need that extra
"w", and once you start explaining why it's there, there's no
> I fixed a couple of the problems Bob noted, and added some
> links to pictures (how to start the Terminal, and what the
> IDLE IDE looks like).
Looks good... But I would suggest...
Python on the Macintosh
You're in luck! Python comes pre-installed on Apple's
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Bill Janssen wrote:
>
> I'm conflicted about "pythonw". On the one hand, this works for
> everything, whereas "python" doesn't. On the other hand, why isn't
> this just what "python" invokes, and how do we explain that to people?
> Another example
I fixed a couple of the problems Bob noted, and added some links to
pictures (how to start the Terminal, and what the IDLE IDE looks
like).
I'm conflicted about "pythonw". On the one hand, this works for
everything, whereas "python" doesn't. On the other hand, why isn't
this just what "python" i
1 - 100 of 103 matches
Mail list logo
