On Tue, Nov 24, 2020 at 6:47 PM Christopher Barker email@example.com wrote:
On Mon, Nov 23, 2020 at 12:09 AM Paul Moore firstname.lastname@example.org wrote:
On Mon, 23 Nov 2020 at 03:37, Christopher Barker email@example.com wrote:
My feeling is that it hits middle ground that isn't very useful. If you can count on your users having a proper Python installation ,then they can use pip to install your package and run your scripts.
If they can't do that, then they likely need a full bundle.
But I could be wrong there.
You're more or less right, although your perspective on what's useful may be biased a little by the fact that (I believe) you're a heavy numpy user.
indeed I am. But also, where I need this sort of thing is for desktop GUIs (wxPython in my case), another heavy user of compiled extensions.
I'm still confused what the point is of a zipapp, if it can't be a proper point and click GUI thing, and it can't use any compiled extensions. How it is it better than a console_script and a pip-installed package??
It CAN be a proper point-and-click GUI thing. You can have a fully executable Python script if it has no dependencies (just distribute a single .py file with a shebang at the top), and if you can't do that, bundle it into a .pyz with zipapp and, again, put a shebang for posix platforms. Windows, if the py.exe launcher is installed, will happily let you double-click on a .py or .pyz and it'll run just fine.
(Annoyingly, you cannot simply exec to this sort of thing on Windows, since it's only a GUI feature. But I believe you can use ShellExecute to invoke them. Can't wait on their output though.)