Hi,
Although I cannot say anything about what are the official guidelines
or recommendations, here's what's my experiences with applications
(opensource, freeware and commercial).
There are two main, widely used ways to distribute applications:
1) as (internally compressed, zipped?) .dmg, which contains
ready-to-run application
(i.e. appname.app). This icon is then instructed to be dragged into the
/Applications/ -folder. Thats all.
2) as an installer (e.g. .pkg or .mpkg) that may be contained in .zip or .dmg.
The installer should install the application into a ready-to-run state,
preferably to /Applications/. The well-behaved, Apple-friendly installers
install the application as /Applications/appname.app so that it is just
possible to click the icon and run the application.
The argument whether to choose 1) or 2) should be based on whether it
is seen absolutely necessary to have a setup process.
Openoffice does have many modules (i.e. the many .pkg files), and it
does require some file associations etc, before it is fully working.
So this would suggest choice 2).
This is the approach NeoOffice has (one .pkg inside .dmg)
However, for example Mozilla Firefox on OS X is distributed as
draggable icon (.app) in .dmg. Firefox definately needs also file
associations etc., but they are taken care of by the initial startup
of the application, not in setup. This is the choice 1).
To maximise user-friendliness and simplicity, I'd prefer using the 1)
choice. It would mean that everybody would get the whole office (and
not decide individually what modules they want) and that perhaps more
work would be needed to transfer the setup -scripts to the first-run
scripts. But I think it would make OO.o very easy to install for the
less tech-savvy.
The choice 2) is not too bad either, if done properly. However, in
this scenario, it is very important that the .app -container is
created by the setup.
Nothing, of course, prevents from making both, depending who is the
packager. The choice 1) is probably more easier/quicker to do
manually. Most of the necessary bits are there already (e.g. my .app
thing), although they do not fit the CVS/JCA things...
BTW, generating .pkg / .mpkg / .dmg / .app for OO.o is 50-80%
automatic when using Xcode developer tools from apple. So even if some
current source code is not OO.o CVS compatible, it shouldn't be a very
big deal to re-create that code by somebody with JCA and with the
developer tools...
Greets,
Mox
--
Mox on G
On 6/18/05, Pavel Janík <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> From: NAKATA Maho <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Sat, 18 Jun 2005 08:14:10 +0900 (JST)
>
> Hi,
>
> > build logs/patches are also available as usual:
> >
> ftp://ooopackages.good-day.net/pub/OpenOffice.org/MacOSX/1.9m110/openoffice.org2-macosx20050618.tar.bz2
> >
> > Pavel: this archive contains a patch that creates dmg automatically
>
> great - now the hardest part of the work is to be done: to convince other
> MacOS X porters that .dmg is the right format to distribute OOo.
>
> I can't say it is good or bad because I do not know MacOS X users and their
> behavior.
> --
> Pavel Janík
>
> Avoid temporary variables.
> -- The Elements of Programming Style (Kernighan & Plaugher)
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
