Yes, command line usage on Windows is a pain. But wouldn't it be possible to add a Python script you have to double-click on and which would do all the stuff for you?
On 2 Jun., 18:08, "Brian Jorgensen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I completely agree with you in principle. And I personally love the command > line, even on windows. But a majority of windows users are unwilling to do > anything with it--including many talented programmers. Here's how it goes > for many people I've known: > > 1. Download ez_setup.py > 2. Start menu, run "cmd" > 3. Type "python ez_setup.py" > 4. Type "easy_install -U sympy" > 5. Huh, command not found? Oh yeah, I probably have to add something to > my PATH. What, though? > 6. Based on a cunning google search, it seems I need to add > "C:\Python25\Scripts" to my PATH. How do I do that again? Should I add it > under "User Variables" or "System Variables"? > > At every step, we're likely to lose part of the audience, converging to 0 > windows users as N goes to infinity ;-) > > So I do think that having an executable installer is important to many users > who read about sympy on reddit and just want to try it out. If inelegant, it > probably won't be much worse than what we've been doing--at worst, we can > just release installers for major versions. > > Brian > > On Mon, Jun 2, 2008 at 8:24 AM, Vinzent Steinberg < > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > I think easy_install could handle all these dependencies > > automatically. The user wouldn't notice any difference. I'd keep the > > full tar ball. We could offer an alternative with setuptols. IMHO not > > being able to use mpmath outside of sympy (or installing mpmath twice) > > just sucks. Especially if there's a large sympy overhead when using > > mpmath from sympy. > > > A good example: TurboGears uses easy_install excessively: > >http://docs.turbogears.org/1.0/Install > > In my opinion, this kind of modularity is great. There could be for > > example an old pyglet version for plotting. A problem are offline > > installations. But for this the tarball still exists. > > > Might be possible that some Windows users prefer graphical installers, > > but I prefer easy_install over such things (even when using Windows). > > It's possible to make an installer though (I think setuptools is able > > to do so). > > > Vinzent > > > On Jun 2, 11:59 am, "Ondrej Certik" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On Sun, Jun 1, 2008 at 8:27 PM, Brian Jorgensen > > > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > > It's been a while, but I'm the one who committed the original sin of > > > > including pyglet. In general, I agree with you. The intent back then > > was to > > > > allow users to plot out-of-the-box, without any external dependencies. > > I've > > > > since come to believe that our users are generally python programmers > > who > > > > can handle the installation of dependencies. > > > > > On the other hand, I want to avoid the situation that used to happen > > with > > > > PyOpenGL on windows: you had to install specific, non-standard versions > > of > > > > numeric, PIL, etc (see > > > >http://www.visionegg.org/install-windows-details.html). Things to think > > > > about: > > > > > * How would this work for people using the windows installer? Can it > > handle > > > > dependencies somehow, or should pyglet be a separate download? > > > > > * Plotting hasn't been updated to use the latest versions of pyglet (we > > > > depend on < 1.0, I think). If someone uses a more recent pyglet, how do > > we > > > > know it's going to work? We might end up getting a lot of bug reports > > > > relating to version mismatch. > > > > > Regrettably, I haven't had enough time to contribute regularly, but > > I've > > > > been toying here and there with different ways of doing plotting. I've > > been > > > > thinking it might be a good idea to make a separate package > > sympy-plotting, > > > > sympy-extras, or similiar. We could offer two windows installers, one > > with > > > > plotting and one without, though it would create quite a bit of extra > > work > > > > for each release. > > > > Thanks for starting this discussion and sharing the ideas. My own > > thoughts: > > > > * As to mpmath, it contains essential things that should imho be part > > > of sympy, also it's just 8 files, no nested directories, so we just > > > plain copy them to sympy and that's it. That's imho the best solution > > > here and this is how it is done now. So I think mpmath is a non-issue. > > > * pyglet: I think we could distribute sympy-pure.tar.gz (without > > > pyglet) and sympy.tar.gz (with pyglet). Unfortunately this means more > > > work for the release manager, as now he needs to test two tarballs, > > > but if it's worthy, let's do it. The only real problem here is the > > > sys.path hack, but that is imho only needed in python2.4, so this > > > should soon become non-issue anyway, as I think in python2.5 it coud > > > be fixed by relative imports and we don't need any sys.path things > > > anymore. An argument could be the size of pyglet --- is there a > > > problem with it? For me the size is ok. > > > > > So, is sympy an everything-but-the-kitchen-sink, batteries-included > > library, > > > > or a svelte library with lots of optional add-ons? > > > > Both. It should be easy enough to get the job done. Imho it needs to > > > be judged on case by case basis, so for mpmath and pyglet, see my > > > thoughts above. > > > > Ondrej > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sympy" group. To post to this group, send email to sympy@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sympy?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
