From musiccomposition at gmail.com  Sat Jun 28 17:56:31 2008
From: musiccomposition at gmail.com (Benjamin Peterson)
Date: Sat, 28 Jun 2008 10:56:31 -0500
Subject: [stdlib-sig] mac module trouble
Message-ID: <1afaf6160806280856s8ddc3datff752f1045cccad7@mail.gmail.com>

Removal of the Mac modules resulted in the Mac framework install
breaking because many of the install scripts depended upon the modules
(see #3174). My current plan is too make a built copy of the IDLE part
of the distribution and kill off every other script that uses the
external modules. Comments?

-- 
Cheers,
Benjamin Peterson
"There's no place like 127.0.0.1."

From mal at egenix.com  Sat Jun 28 18:40:50 2008
From: mal at egenix.com (M.-A. Lemburg)
Date: Sat, 28 Jun 2008 18:40:50 +0200
Subject: [stdlib-sig] mac module trouble
In-Reply-To: <1afaf6160806280856s8ddc3datff752f1045cccad7@mail.gmail.com>
References: <1afaf6160806280856s8ddc3datff752f1045cccad7@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <48666992.4060802@egenix.com>

Benjamin Peterson wrote:
> Removal of the Mac modules resulted in the Mac framework install
> breaking because many of the install scripts depended upon the modules
> (see #3174). My current plan is too make a built copy of the IDLE part
> of the distribution and kill off every other script that uses the
> external modules. Comments?

Isn't that an indication that the modules in question are still needed
and should thus not be removed ?!

-- 
Marc-Andre Lemburg
eGenix.com

Professional Python Services directly from the Source
>>> Python/Zope Consulting and Support ...        http://www.egenix.com/
>>> mxODBC.Zope.Database.Adapter ...             http://zope.egenix.com/
>>> mxODBC, mxDateTime, mxTextTools ...        http://python.egenix.com/
________________________________________________________________________
2008-07-07: EuroPython 2008, Vilnius, Lithuania

:::: Try mxODBC.Zope.DA for Windows,Linux,Solaris,MacOSX for free ! ::::


   eGenix.com Software, Skills and Services GmbH  Pastor-Loeh-Str.48
    D-40764 Langenfeld, Germany. CEO Dipl.-Math. Marc-Andre Lemburg
           Registered at Amtsgericht Duesseldorf: HRB 46611

From brett at python.org  Sat Jun 28 20:02:27 2008
From: brett at python.org (Brett Cannon)
Date: Sat, 28 Jun 2008 11:02:27 -0700
Subject: [stdlib-sig] mac module trouble
In-Reply-To: <48666992.4060802@egenix.com>
References: <1afaf6160806280856s8ddc3datff752f1045cccad7@mail.gmail.com>
	<48666992.4060802@egenix.com>
Message-ID: <bbaeab100806281102w1cee2520t4c70091a466dc42f@mail.gmail.com>

On Sat, Jun 28, 2008 at 9:40 AM, M.-A. Lemburg <mal at egenix.com> wrote:
> Benjamin Peterson wrote:
>> Removal of the Mac modules resulted in the Mac framework install
>> breaking because many of the install scripts depended upon the modules
>> (see #3174). My current plan is too make a built copy of the IDLE part
>> of the distribution and kill off every other script that uses the
>> external modules. Comments?
>
> Isn't that an indication that the modules in question are still needed
> and should thus not be removed ?!
>

Ronald didn't seem to think so. Benjamin's suggestion is based on Ronald's idea.

As for the idea of having a built version with IDLE, as long as
someone else can build it from source, that's fine. As Ronald said,
sticking the file in Mac/Tools and having the build use those files as
needed to build IDLE should be fine if they are truly only funky stuff
that IDLE uses.

-Brett

From ronaldoussoren at mac.com  Sat Jun 28 21:04:24 2008
From: ronaldoussoren at mac.com (Ronald Oussoren)
Date: Sat, 28 Jun 2008 21:04:24 +0200
Subject: [stdlib-sig] mac module trouble
In-Reply-To: <48666992.4060802@egenix.com>
References: <1afaf6160806280856s8ddc3datff752f1045cccad7@mail.gmail.com>
	<48666992.4060802@egenix.com>
Message-ID: <1D0E1F90-58ED-490A-A4DB-59B24DB6D90D@mac.com>


On 28 Jun, 2008, at 18:40, M.-A. Lemburg wrote:

> Benjamin Peterson wrote:
>> Removal of the Mac modules resulted in the Mac framework install
>> breaking because many of the install scripts depended upon the  
>> modules
>> (see #3174). My current plan is too make a built copy of the IDLE  
>> part
>> of the distribution and kill off every other script that uses the
>> external modules. Comments?
>
> Isn't that an indication that the modules in question are still needed
> and should thus not be removed ?!

No.  The best way to build standalone application bundles for the Mac  
is using py2app. As py2app isn't part of the stdlib this cannot be  
used to build IDLE.app.

Ronald

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 2224 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/stdlib-sig/attachments/20080628/acc3e0be/attachment.bin>

From musiccomposition at gmail.com  Sat Jun 28 22:15:47 2008
From: musiccomposition at gmail.com (Benjamin Peterson)
Date: Sat, 28 Jun 2008 15:15:47 -0500
Subject: [stdlib-sig] mac module trouble
In-Reply-To: <bbaeab100806281102w1cee2520t4c70091a466dc42f@mail.gmail.com>
References: <1afaf6160806280856s8ddc3datff752f1045cccad7@mail.gmail.com>
	<48666992.4060802@egenix.com>
	<bbaeab100806281102w1cee2520t4c70091a466dc42f@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <1afaf6160806281315r5d0f4af1labba9973bcc2df0a@mail.gmail.com>

On Sat, Jun 28, 2008 at 1:02 PM, Brett Cannon <brett at python.org> wrote:
>
> As for the idea of having a built version with IDLE, as long as
> someone else can build it from source, that's fine. As Ronald said,
> sticking the file in Mac/Tools and having the build use those files as
> needed to build IDLE should be fine if they are truly only funky stuff
> that IDLE uses.

So long as 2.6 is around we can build the IDLE. Eventually, I think,
the Mac modules/scripts can be packaged for PyPI.

>
> -Brett
>



-- 
Cheers,
Benjamin Peterson
"There's no place like 127.0.0.1."

From ronaldoussoren at mac.com  Sat Jun 28 22:57:34 2008
From: ronaldoussoren at mac.com (Ronald Oussoren)
Date: Sat, 28 Jun 2008 22:57:34 +0200
Subject: [stdlib-sig] mac module trouble
In-Reply-To: <1afaf6160806281315r5d0f4af1labba9973bcc2df0a@mail.gmail.com>
References: <1afaf6160806280856s8ddc3datff752f1045cccad7@mail.gmail.com>
	<48666992.4060802@egenix.com>
	<bbaeab100806281102w1cee2520t4c70091a466dc42f@mail.gmail.com>
	<1afaf6160806281315r5d0f4af1labba9973bcc2df0a@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <2C6DA580-194A-4D17-8F47-72155ADF0481@mac.com>


On 28 Jun, 2008, at 22:15, Benjamin Peterson wrote:

> On Sat, Jun 28, 2008 at 1:02 PM, Brett Cannon <brett at python.org>  
> wrote:
>>
>> As for the idea of having a built version with IDLE, as long as
>> someone else can build it from source, that's fine. As Ronald said,
>> sticking the file in Mac/Tools and having the build use those files  
>> as
>> needed to build IDLE should be fine if they are truly only funky  
>> stuff
>> that IDLE uses.
>
> So long as 2.6 is around we can build the IDLE. Eventually, I think,
> the Mac modules/scripts can be packaged for PyPI.

Most of Mac/Modules and Lib/plat-mac is only of historical interest  
anyway. That's the major reason why these got dropped in 3.0. The  
Carbon bindings have some interest, but only very limited because the  
role of Carbon is getting smaller and smaller in OSX.

I don't think that anyone would be interested in actually maintaining  
the Carbon bindings (another reason for dropping them), just  
modernizing them to wrap all current APIs instead of whatever was  
current in MacOS9 is a lot of work.

Ronald

>
>
>>
>> -Brett
>>
>
>
>
> -- 
> Cheers,
> Benjamin Peterson
> "There's no place like 127.0.0.1."
> _______________________________________________
> stdlib-sig mailing list
> stdlib-sig at python.org
> http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/stdlib-sig

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 2224 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/stdlib-sig/attachments/20080628/0d7068b8/attachment.bin>