| Thread Previous • Date Previous • Date Next • Thread Next |
Hi, Maxwell:I indeed have some considerations to add to this discussion. Firstly, concerning the Mac install, please have a look at my initial attempts here: https://lists.launchpad.net/oship-dev/msg00279.html . Those attempts highlight the important question of having a good "packaging system", if one wishes to simplify the installation process. In fact (as of today), to be able to develop OSHIP we need all the following:
- a C compiling environment ("build-essential" in Ubuntu, "slitaz-toolchain" in Slitaz, "XCode" in MacOSX etc); - the packaging system discussed above (apt-get/yum/tazpkg etc for Linux, fink/macports for MacOSX etc);
- the Bazaar version control system ("bazaar" package, wherever available);
- a Python development environment ("python" and "python-dev" packages);
- Python's easy_install ("setuptools" package);
- Python's virtual environment ("virtualenv" package, or got though:
"easy_install virtualenv");
- Python's Grok (right now supplied with the OSHIP code, but in
principle an independent "dependency");
- the OSHIP code itself (got through the "bzr branch lp:oship" or "bzr
co lp:oship" commands).
One solution is to pack all that in one big "blob", for every platform. Actually, one can think of the Slitaz portable environment I've just described as an example of this "maximalist" approach, to install OSHIP (in fact, it's dead simple to create a custom ISO from it, simply using the "tazlito" command: http://www.slitaz.org/en/doc/handbook/gen-livecd.html). But let's note, in passing, that this procedure has the advantage of already being multiplatform (there are QEMU versions for Windows, MacOSX, Linux etc). When this is not the case, many platform-specific "blobs" have to be recreated for every new release, representing much more work for the "blobbers" (like you and me).
On the opposite side, we have the "minimalist" approaches. They may simply take advantage of the different packaging systems (e.g. a .deb for apt-get/Ubuntu or a .rpm for yum/Fedora -- a good one is still missing for Windows, though) or, going a step further, also use the Python installing mechanisms themselves (distutils, setuptools, PyPI repository etc). My own personal opinion is that, as we are now approaching the 1.0 mark, using PyPI is the best solution for an easy, multiplatform release/install: http://grok.zope.org/documentation/how-to/releasing-software . [Putting Grok as a separate dependency also deserves to be further explored -- this would make our OSHIP "egg" much smaller /portable.]
HTH, Roberto. Maxwell Dayvson a écrit :
Hi Roberto and all,The Slitaz is cool. I'm talk with Tim about an one click install for OSHIP. Would basically create a Debian and RPM package and a dmg for Mac. I'm believe that in the near future will be very interesting to the distribution of OshipWhat do you think? cheers2009/9/28 Roberto Siqueira <siqueira@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:siqueira@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>>Hi all, Due to my own "mobility" (so to speak) needs I've recently set up a portable OSHIP development environment, based on the amazingly small distro: Slitaz GNU/Linux (http://www.slitaz.org/en/index.html). As this technique may be useful for others developers as well, I decided to share this experience here. [...]
| Thread Previous • Date Previous • Date Next • Thread Next |
