Alec Flett wrote: > John Anderson wrote: >> I think it makes sense to have an end-user version that is stripped of >> all the unnecessary stuff, e.g. unused Python packages, pylint, >> pychecker, epydoc tests etc. if it reduces our footprint. Do we have >> any idea how much space can be saved by doing this? >> > I have to agree. In particular, I feel like pylint and epydoc are really > meta-development features - i.e. once you're already a fully-fledged > chandler developer, then you might want to actually use these tools to > improve code.
I agree as well, but that doesn't seem to work for us. We have OSAF people who are non-developers regularly wanting to run for example functional tests with the Chandler they downloaded. > I don't care how cheap disk space is these days, we're starting to seem > like OpenOffice if it takes more than 60M on disk just to run a PIM! Size hasn't been a high priority so far, and I don't think it will be in 0.7 either. And you have to remember the download package is actually compressed so it is not that bad. -- Heikki Toivonen
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Open Source Applications Foundation "Dev" mailing list http://lists.osafoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
