If the OP was able to take the time to familiarise himself with the
technologies, rather than bemoan the difficulty of deploying a ten year old
code-base without mininal effort, he might have some success. Code rot is an
issue after weeks sometimes, never mind ten years, and Python deployment is a
weakness. However the tools do exist if you are prepared to give it a go. I've
had most successful with pyinstaller, which is why I linked to it. Good luck!
On 9 January 2019 17:57:47 GMT, Chris Angelico <ros...@gmail.com> wrote:
>On Thu, Jan 10, 2019 at 2:37 AM Grant Edwards
><grant.b.edwa...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> On 2019-01-09, MRAB <pyt...@mrabarnett.plus.com> wrote:
>>
>> > .py files work on any platform that supports Python: Windows,
>Linux,
>> > MacOs, ...
>>
>> Only after python has been installed along with any other required
>> libraries.
>>
>> > How many platforms support .exe files that were compiled for
>Windows?
>>
>> None.
>>
>> But when your requirement is to support Windows users who are not
>> capable of installing Python, WxWindows, and a half-dozen other
>> libraries, you can't simply hand out .py files, push your fingers
>into
>> your ears, close your eyes, and start yelling "your problem now, not
>> mine, na, na, na, na, na, ...."
>
>This is true - but on the flip side, it's a bit unfair to say "blah
>blah Python sucks because py2exe is hard". That's not Python's fault.
>You have an additional requirement ("support people who can't install
>Python"), and that's going to have extra hassles. LOTS of them, in
>this case.
>
>ChrisA
>--
>https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
--
Sent from my Android device
--
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
