[AstroPy] Deployment and packaging

Steve Crawford crawford at saao.ac.za
Thu Jun 16 07:00:04 EDT 2011

I think my main concerns have been mentioned by others, but I'd just like to add to the discussion some thought to the discussion:

1.  In my experience, the simpler the install procedure, the more likely the adoption.  The first time someone runs into a problem with the install, they will give up and go back to using their old software.   In this light, I would be very supportive of the proposed two package approach:  1.  A pure python/c package with the minimum dependence on other libraries and easily installed using standard tools.   2. A wrapper package for accessing other useful astronomy software.   

2.  My biggest headache in users installing my software is when they have this other monolithic packages installed that install everything.  If your package isn't in the everything, then it can be a nightmare to get your software to install on that system with all the conflicts that can be generated.  

3.  I may be mis-understanding this part of the conversation, but I can not support any packaging which would require paid-licensing at any level in order to install.  Personally, I'm all for supporting Enthought, but it would not be feasible in my community as many African facilities cannot afford or justify licensing to our funding agencies beyond what is really, truly necessary.  That's one of the primary reasons we adopted python as our language of choice and not IDL.    Its free.  

More information about the AstroPy mailing list