This seemed on-topic enough (I hope). While testing a fix to https://bitbucket.org/blais/beancount/issues/217/cannot-invoke-top-level-scripts, I was inspired to do some amount of installation matrix testing just to get a feel for what does or does not work currently. I am not implying that all of these should work or should be supported, and in fact, it seems sane only no target an explicit subset.
Installation sources: - An sdist created with distutils - An sdist created with setuptools - The repo source itself ("installing from source") Installation methods: - python setup.py install (with distutils) - python setup.py install (with setuptools) - pip install ...also, one extra case of bdist_wheel built with wheel/setuptools and installed with pip. Observations: - pip-installing source or distutils-created sdist works fine - pip-installing a bdist_wheel works fine - setuptools-created sdists are broken due to use of 'data_files' to distribute beancount.el. I.e., as is, releases must be baked sans setuptools. (`python -m venv --without-pip ENV` can be used to hide from setuptools, if installed) - On my box, compilation failed trying to setup.py install (with setuptools) from source or from a distutils-created-sdist. On Windows and Ubuntu/WSL. I'm happy the first two cases worked. I don't necessarily care about the third case, except that it means a mixed sdist/bdist_wheel release would require care to avoid producing the sdist from a fully-loaded wheels/setuptools environment. Anyway, did the grunt work of hand-testing those cases and figured I might as well share... -Jeff On Saturday, February 17, 2018 at 9:22:11 AM UTC-6, Jeff Brantley wrote: > > Ok folks, I acknowledge that I may be walking to a minefield by even > asking this question, but I am not trying to troll; I am asking in earnest. > I've been using GnuCash for the past two years, but I'm interested in > migrating to beancount. The general philosophy permeating the documentation > (e.g., command-line accounting in context, comparison to ledger, design > document) resonates strongly with me as both a software engineer and a user. > > However, for me, the lack of native Windows support feels at odds with the > general aims of openness and access to one's data exemplified in plaint > text accounting. I'm not trying to levy a criticism of Martin, this project > he has poured so much work into, his intentions, etc. I'm simply speaking > as a potential user evaluating whether to jump on board. In general, I feel > uneasy about having to use a virtualized solution (i.e., virtual machine, > Cygwin, WSL/Ubuntu) for something I'd hope to accumulate for decades. (Less > generally, I might eventually want to work on, say, a Sublime Text plugin > that can invoke beancount features.) I would feel less uneasy migrating now > if I thought there were a realistic path to eventual (e.g., next handful of > years?) native support. > > So, what I want to ask is: > 1. Do others share this concern? > 2. What is Martin's perspective on this? I gather he does not use Windows, > and this is likely not a priority for his own efforts, but what is his > openness to accommodating native support for Windows? I'm sure it depends > on what is required to get there. > 3. Do we have a feel for what gaps exist that would have to be addressed? > > Regarding #3, some things that I have observed so far: > a) One has to install 3-4 GiB of compiler/build tools from Microsoft in > order to compile the C portions on the fly. This is workable, but ideally > this would be distributed as a binary wheel (or whatever, I'm no expert on > python packaging). > b) Compilation only works at all because Martin is currently willing to > generate and check in the .h/.c files "offline". Does Martin want to move > away from this? > c) bean-query requires readline, which is unavailable on Windows. There is > a pure python module pyreadline, but it appears to be abandoned. > d) Probably minor: bean-web seems to work but is not responsive to > Control+C. > e) bean-bake breaks, and it appears it's due to assuming / is a valid path > separator. Assuming these paths are generated within pure python code, this > would not be a fundamental roadblock, just something to file an issue on > and/or propose a fix. > f) bean-doctor deps notes python-magic is NOT INSTALLED. I'm not sure what > this effects. It looks like there may be a binary version of this package > for windows; I haven't explored this deeply yet. > > I'm sure there are other issues to be found, since I've only tried a few > commands so far, but it's just a question of whether they are fundamental > blockers. My goal is not to formulate a complete issue list or action plan > in this thread. Rather, *I'd like to hear Martin's perspective on this, > and feel out whether there is at least a path to native Windows support*, > separately from the question of who (I'd *like* to find the time) would > work on it, and on what timeframe. > > Thanks > Jeff > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Beancount" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to beancount+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to firstname.lastname@example.org. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/beancount/088a19e7-0e68-4fc2-8f41-cb20b053305f%40googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.