On Sat, Jan 4, 2020 at 12:12 PM Abdur-Rahmaan Janhangeer <arj.pyt...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Fri, 3 Jan 2020, 23:49 Barry Scott, <ba...@barrys-emacs.org> wrote: > > > > > I'm at a lose to understand what the problem is that zipapp is the > > solution to that is not better served > > with pip or PyInstall etc. > > > > Well proposing to enhance zipapp, by adding app metadata and signing. By > pip i understand you mean pure python distribution. Well, an enhanced > zipapp's advantage would be smaller codebase and easy injection detection > among others + the improving the ability to prevent reverse engineering for > those who want it.
Why do you assume pure Python? pip is fully capable of locating and installing binary packages based on the architecture it's running on. > Comparing to native executable well, one thing is program size. You must > have the interpreter on the machine but your program is lighter. 10 python > programs does not mean inclung 10× the interpreter. The proposal also > proposes enhancement to the interpreter to make it more non-programmer > friendly. Also, you must have a dist for every different Os. I'm not sure what your proposal is here. Are you trying to make a single-file executable, or are you trying to make an archive of Python source code (like a jar), or are you trying something different again? > Python, Be Bold captures the spirit of it should not be a shame to have the > interpreter/VM installed on end-users machines. It also facilitates the > work of other python devs. You installed it because of one Python program, > other programs benefit from it. It also proposes enhancements to the VM to > better facilitate that. Uhhhh...... so.... go install Python and then you can install some Python app? Isn't that how things already are? ChrisA -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
