> On 28 Aug 2015, at 11:00, Marcus Denker <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>> 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.
yes, it is in my infinite todo since a couple of years now :(
maybe I will find the time when doing the spur transition…
Esteban
>>
>
>> 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.
We want PharoLauncher as the default download from some time now. Again… no
time to polish the details… :(
>
>>
>> 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).
+42
Esteban
>
> Marcus
>
>
