On 20 Aug 2007, at 18:48 , Martijn Faassen wrote:
Thanks for noticing. I think we need to adopt a routine of building
Windows eggs whenever we make a new release of a package that has C
extensions. There aren't that many packages like that (about a dozen)
and they hopefully aren't going to have that many releases in the future.

I've built Windows eggs for the two you mention now using the MinGW
compiler (nobody has objected to it so far, and I figure
cheap-but-perhaps-slow eggs are better than none). They're up on the

Thanks for these newer versions.

MinGW, btw, is real easy to install and has helped me getting the
eggified Zope 3 finally working on Windows when there were no binary
eggs on the CheeseShop yet.

I'm worried about mixing eggs built with different systems. How is Jim
building his eggs? With Visual Studio?

I assume so.

How solid are MinGW eggs?

So far nobody can tell me, except that Andreas Jung, Hanno Schlichting and a couple of other guys seem to be able to use MinGW well.

Should we really rely on this infrastructure or do we prefer to use
Visual Studio as a community? As far as I understand the Python
interpreter is constructed with a particular version of Visual Studio.

Right, and MinGW somehow contains binary compatibility mode so that MinGW binaries and VisualStudio binaries can interoperate. Don't ask

It might be wise to ask someone with experience with Python
development on the windows platform before we commit to one way or

Sure. I wasn't trying to commit to anything, I was just trying to fix a problem for myself in an inexpensive and convenient way. If somebody donated a VS license, heck, I'll take it :).

Seriously, it would be cool if we could build Windows/Visual Studio eggs in an automated way. Surely buildbot could be used for this, if somebody would make a machine with VS installed available as a slave...

Zope3-dev mailing list
Unsub: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/options/zope3-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com

Reply via email to