I agree on the tarball issue. Having two options doesn't really make sense, and zip is the format supported by both OSes. On the other hand, it's not a lot of trouble to have both options. Whichever way we do it will be fine.
On Sat, Oct 23, 2010 at 3:00 PM, Chris Oliver <[email protected]> wrote: > I'm prepping for another release of 0.92 this weekend it looks like with > romaimperator. We're hoping to solve the issue with the binary on 32bit > Ubuntu and hopefully get out proper separate builds for Linux and Windows > that don't cause issue. After that we will be moving on to 1.0 and tackling > things as speedy as we can in hopes of getting it out soon. > What I really am interested in hearing your thoughts on though is download > formats. Right now we package each release into a tarball AND zipfile. I > don't see a reason for this. Ubuntu can extra zip's by default, so the > tarball is just typically preference. It's completely unnecessary imo. > Windows users can't use it, and for our next release, we will have the > following: > Single file binary for Linux > Single file binary > Debian package for Linux (built on launchpad hopefully using quickly) > Source tarball? (maybe, but they can just download the source with bazaar > easy enough) > Does this make sense? I want to make sure I'm not forgetting anything > important. :-) > -- > Chris Oliver > http://excid3.com > > _______________________________________________ > Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~keryx > Post to : [email protected] > Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~keryx > More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp > > _______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~keryx Post to : [email protected] Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~keryx More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
