> On 26 Aug 2015, at 18:39, Ben Coman <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> What are the future plans for dealing with OSX code signing?
>
We need to do it. We should have done it ages ago, nobody had the time.
>
> So if we can no longer store a writable Image under the Resources
> folder, what are the alternatives?
>
> 1. Deliver app with read-only Image under the Resources folder. The
> INI file can define the location of the writeable Image under
> ../{user}/Library/. When the VM starts, if the writable Image file
> does not exist, the VM transparently copies the read-only Image from
> resources to the writable location.
>
I want to ship the an app called “Pharo5” that contains the VM, sources
and a read-only image template.
This just lives in /Applications.
-> start it, it starts the template
-> save template, it saves a one file pharo image
-> klick on a pharo image, it starts the correct VM contained in Pharo<Version>
package
> 2. Use a launcher application like PharoLauncher.
I would like to have the launcher concept be integrated with what i described.
But I am not
sure I want just a launcher to start when clicking on “Pharo”. And it needs to
play well with
people that manage images themselves.
>
> 3. For a "portable" app (e.g. on USB stick) push the app down one
> folder, so rather than putting the Win/Lin executables inside the OSX
> app, the top level folder contains folders Windows, Linux, Common, and
> the app.
No, I would retire that concept. (I know some people love it, but I think it
does
not fit into days world where the OS installs Apps).
Marcus
