← Back to team overview

keryx team mailing list archive

Re: Tarballs?


I agree on the tarball issue. Having two options doesn't really make
sense, and zip is the format supported by both OSes.
On the other hand, it's not a lot of trouble to have both options.
Whichever way we do it will be fine.

On Sat, Oct 23, 2010 at 3:00 PM, Chris Oliver <excid3@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> I'm prepping for another release of 0.92 this weekend it looks like with
> romaimperator. We're hoping to solve the issue with the binary on 32bit
> Ubuntu and hopefully get out proper separate builds for Linux and Windows
> that don't cause issue. After that we will be moving on to 1.0 and tackling
> things as speedy as we can in hopes of getting it out soon.
> What I really am interested in hearing your thoughts on though is download
> formats. Right now we package each release into a tarball AND zipfile. I
> don't see a reason for this. Ubuntu can extra zip's by default, so the
> tarball is just typically preference. It's completely unnecessary imo.
> Windows users can't use it, and for our next release, we will have the
> following:
> Single file binary for Linux
> Single file binary
> Debian package for Linux (built on launchpad hopefully using quickly)
> Source tarball? (maybe, but they can just download the source with bazaar
> easy enough)
> Does this make sense? I want to make sure I'm not forgetting anything
> important. :-)
> --
> Chris Oliver
> http://excid3.com
> _______________________________________________
> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~keryx
> Post to     : keryx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~keryx
> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

Follow ups