Re: [Pythonmac-SIG] My stab at a new page
At 8:29 PM -0800 2/8/06, Bill Janssen wrote: >I've made up a sample page, at >http://bill.janssen.org/new-macpython-page.html. > >This is the kind of thing I'd like to see replace the page at >http://www.python.org/download/download_mac.html. Bill, As the sort of somewhat sophisticated novice python developer (how is that for a contradiction of terms?) that you folks seem to be targeting, I really like this page. It could use a little bit of cleaning up, such as possibly describing why to use IDLE, how using a newer version of Python can help the user, etc. It is a great start. I look forward to seeing something as straightforward as this replacing the current page. Now, what I really want to see added is something that explains how I can write a program in Python on the Mac and create standalone applications that can run on someone else's computer without them having to install anything else. The descriptions of packaging for Python that I have read here are fairly arcane and not at all straightforward for new developers. As much as I like the general idea of Python, this is the one thing that seems to make the language not ready for end-user applications. It might seem that this isn't Mac specific. But, since the packaging of Python apps on the Mac seems to be different than on other platforms, having a link to it from the main page would be a useful thing. It could certainly be far down the page rather than right at the beginning. Even better would be a discussion of how to move such apps to other operating systems as well. Python may be more elegant than Java, but I can easily give someone a Java app to run on their computer. I'm not confident I could do this for much beyond helloworld with Python and expect it to run since there wouldn't likely be the libraries that I need. Thanks, -Rodney ___ Pythonmac-SIG maillist - Pythonmac-SIG@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pythonmac-sig
Re: [Pythonmac-SIG] My stab at a new page
At 1:20 PM -0800 2/9/06, Bob Ippolito wrote: >py2app is the solution for application packaging, and you must use >it with a third party Python installation (e.g. Python 2.4.1) in >order to come up with something that's redistributable and robust. >If you happen to use the system Python, then you will produce a >package that only runs on the particular release of Mac OS X that >you build it with. In other words, when you or your users upgrade >to Mac OS X 10.5, any system-Python built application bundle will >cease to function at all. > >It is actually not much different than on other platforms. Many >py2exe-based setup scripts work identically with py2app if you >change the import statement. Mac-specific features of course >require Mac- specific solutions, but the standard stuff is identical. > >There is some minimal documentation: http://undefined.org/python/ py2app.html In general, I know this. I try to at least skim the messages on this list on a regular basis to keep up with what is going on in the MacPython world. But, for someone who is new to Python, the documentation you are pointing to is pretty rough going. It would be really nice to have a more basic introduction to what py2app actually does. Then, a step by step description of how to make it work, rather than just jumping into setup.py scripts. (Where does setup.py come from? The documentation doesn't say. I'm not asking this, just pointing out that it will be confusing to someone just trying to learn this stuff. They are going to want to know why they have to "build their application" when they already have it running.) >Any other questions you have can probably be answered by py2exe >documentation and/or this list. Yes, I'm sure they can be. I don't see any reference to actually taking a look at the py2exe documentation. Everything states that it is similar, but for the Mac. It doesn't say take a look there if you need more help. Or to ask here. But this discussion is about how to make this easier for people to get into. Having to ask here isn't that bad. Everyone here is very friendly and helpful. But, many people don't like to subscribe to mailing lists, especially to ask one question. Most of the discussions that go on here are *WAY* over the heads of beginners and even many intermediate Python users. And, the answers often times make assumptions about what the user knows rather than offering basic advice. I'm not complaining, really. I know that you and everyone here do this on your own time and do your best to help everyone. Python on the Mac really needs a very easily accessible discussion board for people to read and ask questions. python-mac is intimidating to someone getting started. Those who aren't so timid may stick it out, but many people will likely skim the messages on the python.org website and walk away after deciding that this stuff is just too tough. The ones who are already programmers aren't the ones I'm talking about. I'm more talking about the new scripter or maybe someone who has done a little bit of AppleScript or possibly HTML and basic JavaScript. While I can articulate what I want to see and can put myself in the place of the absolute beginner (I'm not too far from that myself with Python and I teach technical courses to varying skill levels of users for a living), I unfortunately don't have the Python background to write this material myself. I hope this helps get across what I'm looking for and what I think will benefit people trying to get started with Python on the Mac. -Rodney ___ Pythonmac-SIG maillist - Pythonmac-SIG@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pythonmac-sig
Re: [Pythonmac-SIG] My stab at a new page
At 1:39 PM -0800 2/9/06, Bill Janssen wrote: >Great idea, Rodney. I think we probably need a number of pages like >this, kind of an FAQ set. I think the main page should just cover one >or two things (how to run python, how to upgrade), and lots of >pointers to these pages. Each of these should be fairly clear, with >pointers off to more complicated explanations. > >Here's the start of a list: > >1) What's the difference between "python" and "pythonw"? >2) What's the advantage of upgrading? >3) What do I do if I want to use pre-built packages? >4) How do I use the Apple GUI toolkit from Python? >5) How do I use Apple Events from Python? >6) How do I build a real Mac application written in Python? >7) How do I install extra modules, like PIL, for the system Python? >8) What IDE's are available, and what are their relative merits? Bill, You seem to have a good handle on what is needed to get new users involved in working with Python on the Mac. Even some of the questions that you list here might be a little too complex for new users. For example, question 3 probably needs to state something about all of the pre-built packages that are available before asking how to use them. Question 6 needs to at least talk about what is involved if the user wants this application to run on multiple platforms, not just Mac. For example, can they build on the Mac and the distribute on other platforms? Or do you have to build on each platform? It is likely that your idea of pointing to more complicated explanations could take care of each of kind of points that I'm raising. My key idea that I'm trying to point out is that for such a list to be useful to beginners, it needs to not make so many assumptions about what they know. An introductory paragraph in each question can help out quite a bit. For example, is it actually safe to assume that a new user even knows what the Apple GUI toolkit is? A sentence or two talking about the great UI functionality that Apple makes available and that it can be accessed from Python should be there before launching into an explanation of how to actually do so. Remember, this should serve people who haven't programmed before as well as people who have but are just new to Python. -Rodney ___ Pythonmac-SIG maillist - Pythonmac-SIG@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pythonmac-sig
Re: [Pythonmac-SIG] My stab at a new page
At 9:51 AM -0800 2/10/06, Bill Janssen wrote: >The problem is that there are many kinds of "new users". > This is true. The trick, in my view, is to make sure to define terms when they are first used. That way, the actual beginners have a chance of following along and the more experienced "new users" will skim over that sentence or two and get to the meat of what they are trying to find out. I don't see any other useful way to serve everyone on a single getting started page without either setting the bar too high for true newbies or frustrating the more experienced folks. Links to pages for more detailed explanations can prevent the basic definitions from taking up too much room. But a simple sentence or two of introduction to each topic with novices in mind will go a long way toward eliminating assumptions of what people know. -Rodney ___ Pythonmac-SIG maillist - Pythonmac-SIG@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pythonmac-sig
Re: [Pythonmac-SIG] My stab at a new page
At 11:58 AM -0800 2/10/06, Christopher Barker wrote: >Rodney Somerstein wrote: >>. It would be really nice to have a more basic introduction to what >>py2app actually does. > >Why don't you write that, put it in the Wiki, then ask this list for >technical review. That's what Wikis are for, and I think often >recent newbies are the best people to write newbie docs, when you >still remember what questions you have. Thanks for the suggestion. I suppose I should have expected this when I posted. While I can explain the basic concept of what py2app does, my knowledge pretty much stops there. Given that I'm not much beyond the helloworld level or using Python right now, I will decline for the moment. Due to time constraints, I will not likely move much beyond this in the short-term future. So, I could write one to two sentences that it takes to explain the purpose of py2app. Beyond that, someone else would need to fill in the details. -Rodney ___ Pythonmac-SIG maillist - Pythonmac-SIG@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pythonmac-sig
[Pythonmac-SIG] Bad download link on python.org
I didn't notice anyone mentioning this on previous discussions, but currently, if you click the download link on the left side of the main python.org site, it takes you to a page that states this about the Mac version of Python: Python 2.3 OS X 10.2 installer (requires admin privileges -- see MacPython download page for details). Note that as of the 2.4 Python release, the Mac OS X installer is still at version 2.3. The actual link in that paragraph to the MacPython download page directs people to a non-existent page at Jack Jansen's old site. So, not only do people think that the latest version of MacPython is 2.3, but they can't even download that. If this has already been pointed out here on the list, then nevermind. -Rodney ___ Pythonmac-SIG maillist - Pythonmac-SIG@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pythonmac-sig
[Pythonmac-SIG] Recurring question - which python should I use?
As the title of this message asks, which Python should I use? And why? From following discussions here, I know why I don't want to use the built in Apple Python. So, that leaves 2 choices that both seem good, the macpython framework build and ActiveState. The main reason that I would want to use the "official" framework build is that it is endorsed by this community. It is, however, a volunteer effort and actually states that it is usually one micro-version behind the most recent. For ActiveState, it seems to be well supported and more up to date. Though I understand that there could be issues that people here might have trouble helping me with because I'm using a different Python. So, why would I really want to use one vs. the other? Will I have a harder time finding cross-platform packages that work with the ActiveState build? Am I going to have to compile many of the packages that I want anyway, regardless of the Python I use? Other than possible commercial distribution issues are there any real disadvantages of ActiveState's distribution? How about the "official" framework build? What is one or the other missing that is present in the other one? I know this has been asked before, but I couldn't find it in a quick scan of the archives. The official page and Wiki don't seem to give me these answers and neither does ActiveState's page. If it influences the answers, I am looking to build a cross-platform application that I eventually want to be able to package for easy installation by non-Python savvy users. Thanks for your help and suggestions with this one, -Rodney ___ Pythonmac-SIG maillist - Pythonmac-SIG@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pythonmac-sig
Re: [Pythonmac-SIG] Recurring question - which python should I use?
Thanks for the answer, Bob, and thanks for the work on the Universal build, Ronald. If someone could answer my other questions as well, I would really appreciate it. As a beginner, what does having a working readline actually mean to me? If I'm not building command line apps do I need that for user input? And why wouldn't ActiveState have one? Given that ActiveState seems to put forth the effort to make a release of Python that is compatible across multiple platforms, including a Universal Mac build, why does the MacPython community maintain a separate framework build? (No criticism intended here, I want to understand this) Again, is there really any reason that I would want to use one release over the other? Is it simply a matter of readline, whatever that buys me (I'm obviously a beginner to Python even though I've read a bit about it over the years) or is there some other major reason? Such as, will I have problems creating redistributable app bundles with ActiveState since Bob seems to be working mostly with the MacPython build? How about other add-on libraries I might want to use? If I go with the MacPython framework build, how likely is it to catch up to the current release of Python? I notice that it has been 6 months since the 2.4.2 release and it isn't easy for a new user to find links to a "official" Mac build of this version. I do note that Ronald has stated he will put out a 2.4.3 build when 2.4.3 is release, but I can't even find links to 2.4.2 on python.org. Is this likely to change? Thanks, -Rodney ___ Pythonmac-SIG maillist - Pythonmac-SIG@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pythonmac-sig
Re: [Pythonmac-SIG] Recurring question - which python should I use?
Thanks for your extensive answer, Bob. I will definitely go with the universal build given what you have said, just to facilitate getting help with any problems I run into. As for py2app not working with that yet, I'm still a long way from having anything ready to package anyway, so that isn't an issue for me. -Rodney ___ Pythonmac-SIG maillist - Pythonmac-SIG@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pythonmac-sig
Re: [Pythonmac-SIG] Recurring question - which python should I use?
(Lots of stuff about non-Universal builds of stuff and other comments from various people removed...) Luckily for me, I'm still a good ways away from needing to actually create a standalone app. That is just my ultimate goal. If there isn't a universal build of py2app by the time that I'm ready for it, we can probably assume that there never will be. As far as I can tell, Bob is working MUCH faster than my current time scale since I'm just in the learning stages. The same thing would hold true for wxPython, which I will likely use. I still have to finish learning Python before really diving into that. And in the meantime, if I start before there is a universal build, people who have Intel Macs (not me at the moment) will just have to run under Rosetta. I expect they will probably never notice the difference for the kinds of things I'm likely to be doing. As for the comment about not knowing how to build a standalone application that installs Python... Well, unless I'm horribly mistaken, this is exactly what py2app on the Mac and py2exe does under Windows. I'm assuming there is a Unix equivalent as well. Based on the discussions I've seen on this list, I can't come up with any reason I would want to use the Apple supplied version of Python rather than having my application include it. There is always application size, I suppose, but I don't think that will be a major issue for me. -Rodney ___ Pythonmac-SIG maillist - Pythonmac-SIG@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pythonmac-sig
[Pythonmac-SIG] IDLE and MacPython 2.5
I downloaded Python 2.5 yesterday and am having a problem with the included IDLE. If I launch IDLE by double-clicking, it shows up in the task bar, then immediately goes away. I see no windows, menus, etc. for the program. If I type IDLE at the command line, IDLE 1.2 launches with no problem. The icon in the task bar appears to be Python Launcher in that case, not IDLE. If I launch the IDLE.app from MacPython 2.4 by double-clicking, it launches IDLE 1.1.3 with no problems. Does anyone have any suggestions? Is IDLE.app broken under MacPython 2.5? While I can launch it from terminal, it is definitely more convenient to just double-click. I am using IDLE because I have been working my way through the O'Reilly Learning Python book at a glacial pace over the last year or more and it is nice to have a simple Python-aware interactive editor. -Rodney -- Rodney SomersteinAlways remember that you are unique... [EMAIL PROTECTED] just like everyone else. ___ Pythonmac-SIG maillist - Pythonmac-SIG@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pythonmac-sig
Re: [Pythonmac-SIG] IDLE and MacPython 2.5
Ronald Oussoren wrote:
>Could you open Console.app, clear the log and then try to start IDLE
>again? Hopefully IDLE runs into a problem that gets written to the
>console log.
Here is what I see when I double-click on IDLE:
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "/Applications/MacPython
2.5/IDLE.app/Contents/Resources/idlemain.py", line 27, in
main()
File
"/Library/Frameworks/Python.framework/Versions/2.5/lib/python2.5/idlelib/PyShell.py",
line 1393, in main
macosxSupport.setupApp(root, flist)
File
"/Library/Frameworks/Python.framework/Versions/2.5/lib/python2.5/idlelib/macosxSupport.py",
line 110, in setupApp
hideTkConsole(root)
File
"/Library/Frameworks/Python.framework/Versions/2.5/lib/python2.5/idlelib/macosxSupport.py",
line 26, in hideTkConsole
root.tk.call('console', 'hide')
_tkinter.TclError: invalid command name "console"
___
Pythonmac-SIG maillist - Pythonmac-SIG@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pythonmac-sig
Re: [Pythonmac-SIG] IDLE and MacPython 2.5
Thanks Chris and David for the suggestions. I'm already aware of other editors. But, as I mentioned, I'm currently learning Python and an environment that actually lets me execute python code without having to first create and save a file is superior for that purpose, in my opinion. I already own BBEdit and have for many years. So, when I start actually writing real code, I will likely use that. >For what it' worth, perhaps to save you some time, I recently spent >a day evaluating >these tools. Horses for courses, but for me: >TextWrangler is a freebie BBEditLite - a very nice word-processor >which is keyword aware; >SPE is a full-blown development environment which includes wxglade >interface to wxwindows >I found it difficult to 'grock' quickly but it could be good >ScrIDE is 1/2 way between. > >David > >On 26/10/2006, at 2:13 AM, Christopher Barker wrote: > >>While we're at it, if all you want is a Python-aware editor -- then >>there area a lot of other (better?) options. Scan the archives of this >>list for suggestions. A few: >> >>BBEdit (TextWrangler?) >>Eclipse >>SPE >>Jedit >>ScrIDE >> >> >>Assorted *nix editors: emaca, VIm, etc, etc. >> >>or look here: >> >>http://wiki.python.org/moin/PythonEditors >> >>-Chris -- Rodney SomersteinAlways remember that you are unique... [EMAIL PROTECTED] just like everyone else. ___ Pythonmac-SIG maillist - Pythonmac-SIG@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pythonmac-sig
Re: [Pythonmac-SIG] IDLE and MacPython 2.5
At 7:40 AM +0200 10/27/06, Ronald Oussoren wrote: >Why does everyone seem to want to push people away from IDLE? IDLE >isn't award-winning material, but it does work properly as a simple >python environment. > >In a way it is better than most programmers text editors because >although it is missing some of the advanced editor features these >offer it does come with an embedded python interpreter and debugger. > I was wondering about this myself. IDLE colors Python commands and offers help with commands while typing. It seems to be an excellent learning environment. I don't think I will use it when writing actual applications, but for right now, it seems to make more sense than Python from the Terminal application or any of the editors people have mentioned. I do appreciate everyone's suggestions of alternatives. For right now, though, IDLE is working for me again and I'm happily testing various commands and testing out answers to the end of section questions in Learning Python. -Rodney -- Rodney SomersteinAlways remember that you are unique... [EMAIL PROTECTED] just like everyone else. ___ Pythonmac-SIG maillist - Pythonmac-SIG@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pythonmac-sig
[Pythonmac-SIG] Status of Python 3.0 for Mac?
Given the recent release of Python 3.0, I've been surprised to see no mention of a Mac release of this. Is anyone working on an official release? If so, is there an expected release date? Thanks, -Rodney ___ Pythonmac-SIG maillist - Pythonmac-SIG@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pythonmac-sig
Re: [Pythonmac-SIG] Which version to use??
On Tuesday, May 24, 2010, Aahz wrote: If you care about the Mac (particularly in terms of being able to use PyObjC and/or py2app), stick with 2.x for now. Otherwise, it doesn't matter much which exact version of 3.x you use. This brings up a question for me as to what the state of Python is on the Mac. Python 3.x has been a available for quite awhile. I see on Python.org that 3.1.2 is listed as the current download for the Mac. What exactly is the current state of this? What doesn't work on the Mac in Python 3 and what are current plans related to this? The Mac Python community seems pretty small. Given that Python seems to position itself as a major programming and scripting language, it seems rather strange that there is so little effort placed into providing first class support for the second most popular computing platform. I know that various individuals on this list put a tremendous amount of work into porting and supporting various parts of Python on the Mac platform. But what is the overall state of Python here? Especially in regards to Python 3, which seems to definitely be the future of the language. I have looked at moving into Python several times over the years, but it always seems to be a second class language when it comes to producing programs to run on the Mac. At least outside of various command line tools. Is Python moving toward parity with the Windows and Unix world on the Macintosh? Thanks, -Rodney ___ Pythonmac-SIG maillist - Pythonmac-SIG@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pythonmac-sig unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/Pythonmac-SIG
Re: [Pythonmac-SIG] Which version to use??
At 11:17 AM -0700 5/25/10, Christopher Barker wrote: Honestly, I don't know if the Mac is in any poorer position with regard to Python 3 as any other platform. NONE of the major packages I use have been ported to Py3 on any platform: numpy, SciPy, wxPython. Many of those are well supported on the Mac, so I don't think there will be any issues there. Thanks, Chris. This is the kind of thing I was trying to find out. After I asked the question I started reading the comp.lang.python newsgroup and see that lots of people seem to be in the same situation. There are a fair number of people wanting to USE Python 3.x - that is, develop WITH Python 3.x. However, the people that make all of the tools for those of us that want to use them are not porting or are at least not being very public about their ports. To someone like me, who is mostly looking in from the outside, Python seems like it has a lot of potential but the fragmentation of the development community is a bit problematic. Unless the powers that be decide to once and for all cease development of the 2.x branch of Python, I'm not sure that 3.x will ever end up having the support that it needs in terms of ported packages. If I had the ability to port something like wxPython, I would definitely do so. Unfortunately, that isn't the case. It seems kind of strange to start doing work with 2.7 when supposedly 3.1.2 is the current version. Does no one other than the maintainers of the language itself want 3.x to succeed? The Mac Python community seems pretty small. There are a LOT of folks using Python on teh Mac -- the community that is pretty small is the community of folks doing mac-specific stuff -- PyObjC, for instance. It getting to be that the the fradction of development that is done for desktop apps is pretty small -- and that that is done is often done with cross-platfrom tools. True. Unfortunately, the cross-platform tools like wxPython don't seem to be there for Python 3. I would love to use Python for some cross-platform application development. Packaging on the Mac, in particular, though, seems to be a bit iffy. Yes, there is on-going work on py2app. However, it seems to mostly be a one person project with work done as available. (A hazard of open source, I guess.) The only folks that care about py2app are folks doing desktop development and the only folks that care about PyObjC are folks doing desktop development for Mac-only applications. If that is what you want to do, then you are right, the community is pretty small -- is there a larger one built around an open-source dynamic language? I have no idea. I'm not sure that there is a larger Mac community built around an open-source dynamic language. However, I'm trying to figure out how viable Python is to develop applications on the Mac. That requires at least py2app for packaging and PyObjC for full access to Mac native controls, from what I can tell. wxPython may be a viable option, but the 3.x support seems MIA. Given that Python seems to position itself as a major programming and scripting language, it seems rather strange that there is so little effort placed into providing first class support for the second most popular computing platform. It does have first class support for scripting, command line stuff, web app development, etc -- one reason the there are so many more users of Python on the Mac than there are folks on this list is that all that stuff "just works". I suppose that is true. Maybe it is just application development where people want native applications for the various platforms that doesn't "just work". It is possible that Python will never be that. I have been hoping for a long time that it would be moving in that direction. That is the main reason for my original questions here. Thanks, -Rodney ___ Pythonmac-SIG maillist - Pythonmac-SIG@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pythonmac-sig unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/Pythonmac-SIG
Re: [Pythonmac-SIG] Which version to use??
At 10:08 PM +0200 5/25/10, Ronald Oussoren wrote: Python 3.1.2 works fine on OSX. There is an issue with building extensions on OSX 10.6, but that will be fixed in 3.1.3. PyObjC in the repository works with python 3 and I'm working towards a release. I haven't looked into py2app yet. With some luck it will work without major changes. Good to hear. Thanks for the hard work on PyObjC. Do you have specific plans to look into py2app for Python 3? > The Mac Python community seems pretty small. Given that Python seems to position itself as a major programming and scripting language, it seems rather strange that there is so little effort placed into providing first class support for the second most popular computing platform. I know that various individuals on this list put a tremendous amount of work into porting and supporting various parts of Python on the Mac platform. But what is the overall state of Python here? Especially in regards to Python 3, which seems to definitely be the future of the language. Porting to py3k is an issue throughout the python community, mostly because cleanly porting non-trivial projects takes time. What hasn't helped is that a lot of project depend on setuptools and that didn't supported until pretty recently (and that only through the 'distribute' fork). As far as PyObjC is concerned port to py3k was a lot of work due to C-API changes and because PyObjC tries to provide seemless integration between Python and Cocoa, which means it is pretty sensitive to the large changes between python 2.x and 3.x. It's great to see dedicated people such as yourself continuing this kind of work. Hopefully things will start to fall into place for Python 3.x. I see questions on comp.lang.python and elsewhere from people wanting to use Python 3.x as their main development language. I think many people, such as myself, are reluctant to jump into Python right now. My perception is that 2.x has a limited life span. It seems not to be the best choice to jump into that right now when the 3.x branch of the language itself is where most work seems to be going on. However, as you noted, many packages aren't trivial to port and that seems to be going very slowly. Are you planning on focusing on 3.x from this point forward with only maintenance on the 2.x version of PyObjC? How far away is Python 3 from being the main branch of the language? Are we talking another year? 2? 5? > I have looked at moving into Python several times over the years, but it always seems to be a second class language when it comes to producing programs to run on the Mac. At least outside of various command line tools. Is Python moving toward parity with the Windows and Unix world on the Macintosh? What do you mean? Python on OSX is support as well as it is on Linux and Windows. I'm not trying to denigrate the hard work that you and others put into keeping Python functioning well on the Mac. In part, due to the fact that packaging seems to be trickier for people to figure out with py2app than with py2exe I have gotten that impression. Maybe most people are using py2app with very little trouble and I'm only seeing the problems and requests for help that get reported here. It sounds like for pure Mac development, that a bit of testing and hopefully minor tweaking will be enough to get py2app running well. Once that is done, Python 3 may actually work as a great development language for Mac applications. The only thing really missing once that is done is a port of a good cross-platform UI library, such as wxWidgets, so that cross-platform apps can be developed easily. I also think that another part of the issue is simply that there are many more Windows developers than Mac developers. This means simply that more packages get released for Windows earlier than on the Mac. Similarly there may be more UI libraries and such under Windows because more people write them. For Unix/Linux, I suspect that a larger percentage of the users are actually developers, based on what I've seen in the past. That would tend to lead to more people capable of fixing code and contributing to ports themselves on those platforms. Maybe what I have to resign myself to is that if I want to develop in Python 3 (or any Python for that matter) for desktop applications, I need to be willing to live with any limitations. This is because I don't have the skill to code around those limitations in C. Alternatively I could develop my C and C++ skills as well as Python skills all at the same time so that I can port needed packages. That doesn't seem very realistic. This may just be a matter of the open source nature of Python. -Rodney ___ Pythonmac-SIG maillist - Pythonmac-SIG@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pythonmac-sig unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/Pythonmac-SIG
