Re: [Tools-arch] Recommendation 6: Architectural model for clients

[Mark Nottingham <[e-mail]>]

> On 23 Apr 2021, at 12:23 pm, John R Levine <[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
>>> I'm now completely confused about what you want us to do.  Assuming we agree that we want to have tools that work reliably on the platforms that people are likely to use (which seems to be Windows, Mac, and linux) how do we get there?
>> 
>> By improving the tools we have -- including how they're delivered, documented and supported.
> 
> I was hoping for something more concrete.
> 
> For example, should we be able to provide each tool as a native installable package on the major platforms?  If so, do you have an estimate of how much work that would involve?

My role here, as I understand it, is not to provide estimates or detailed plans -- it's to provide high-level input to the architecture (note: architecture) of our tools stack. Jay, if I misunderstand that, please correct me.

> (Try installing xml2rfc on Windows to see how painful the current setup is.)

Well, about 20 seconds on DuckDuckGo found:
  
"""
“Freezing” your code is creating a single-file executable file to distribute to end-users, that contains all of your application code as well as the Python interpreter.

Applications such as ‘Dropbox’, ‘Eve Online’, ‘Civilization IV’, and BitTorrent clients do this.

The advantage of distributing this way is that your application will “just work”, even if the user doesn’t already have the required version of Python (or any) installed. On Windows, and even on many Linux distributions and OS X, the right version of Python will not already be installed.
""" -- <https://docs.python-guide.org/shipping/freezing/>

There are other approaches if that isn't suitable, e.g.:
  https://cyrille.rossant.net/create-a-standalone-windows-installer-for-your-python-application/


--
Mark Nottingham   https://www.mnot.net/