[Zope-dev] Re: [Zope3-dev] December release post-mortem

[Jim Fulton]

Sidnei da Silva wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 18, 2006 at 10:45:20AM -0500, Jim Fulton wrote:
> | People up to now have come up with systems like this that they thought were
> | automated enough.  That's why we don't have a 2.9 release for windows.
> 
> What about we turn that around. How would you describe a 'automated
> enough' build environment? I suspect you consider:
> 
>   python setup.py bdist_wininst
> 
> to be pretty close to that.

I think

http://www.zope.org/Wikis/DevSite/Projects/ComponentArchitecture/ZopeWindowsRelease

Is pretty close.  Note that this has a number os steps, but there are few
and they are well documented, so I don't have to think.

 > How does it differ from:
> 
>   make installer

It uses a real language.

> once all dependencies are in place?

The process has to include getting al of the dependencies in place.

> I agree that the procedure for building the current Windows installer,
> though documented (yes, it is documented), has more steps than
> required. One place where it could be streamlined is that it expects
> you to download the Python 2.3 Windows Installer and tarball manually
> and put them into a specific directory. That could certainly be done
> by the makefile.

As I said before, the fact that we don't have a windows release
is proof that the process isn't automated enough.  I also know
for a fact that Tim did a *lot* of work to get the installer that
he asked people to review.  This might be inevitable, given the
changes in Python, but I don't think it needs to be as bad as it is.

And, as I said before, we shouldn't be inventing this ourselves
if we can possibly avoid it.

Jim

-- 
Jim Fulton           mailto:jim at zope.com       Python Powered!
CTO                  (540) 361-1714            http://www.python.org
Zope Corporation     http://www.zope.com       http://www.zope.org