[Zope3-dev] Re: Zope 3.0, and why I won't use it

[Lennart Regebro]

Jim Fulton wrote:
> Because we want to use distutils.  It *absolutely sucks* writing windows
> installers.  I'd really rather that Zope Corp not be in that business.

It's not that bad, but... no I don't have the time either. :-(


(Yes, I have ten Zope installations on my computer, and I'm actively 
using five of them).

So it's not absolutely necessary, to support this with the Windows 
installation, but it needs to be documented that this is a viable 
install when doing development.

> Perhaps we should have 2 kinds of Windows binary releases:
> 
> - A developers release that is just a zip file that contains
>   pyds, and
> 
> - A non-developer release that works like the current installer, but
>   with easier access to documentation and applications for setting
>   up instances.

That could work. It also seems to me that Zope2/3 works fine with the 
free version of Microsoft C compiler that is available, and that means 
that Zope developers probably can use the source-install to get separate 
Zope versions if they install that compiler. But yeah, a binary 
developers realease would be better.

> Perhaps we should only distribute a developer's releases until we have
> a decent installer and a better end-user story.

+1 for this.

A thought just popped into my head. Would it be possible to make an 
installer that just unzips including the already compiled binaries and 
then you have  two options, which basically is "make install", to put it 
into site-packages and "make instance" to just make a separate instance?

-- 
Lennart Regebro, Nuxeo     http://www.nuxeo.com/
CPS Content Management     http://www.cps-project.org/