Re: Distributing programs depending on third party modules.

2007-05-16 Thread Tina I
Kevin Walzer wrote: > Tina I wrote: >> Kevin Walzer wrote: > > >> And maybe the smartest thing to do would be to dump PyQt and just go >> for tkinter, however ugly it is :/ > > Tkinter doesn't have to be ugly. > > I sell a proprietary Tkinter app commercially on OS X: > > http://www.codebykev

Re: Distributing programs depending on third party modules.

2007-05-16 Thread Kevin Walzer
Tina I wrote: > Kevin Walzer wrote: > And maybe the smartest thing to do would be to dump PyQt and just go for > tkinter, however ugly it is :/ Tkinter doesn't have to be ugly. I sell a proprietary Tkinter app commercially on OS X: http://www.codebykevin.com/phynchronicity-running.png It tak

Re: Distributing programs depending on third party modules.

2007-05-16 Thread Kevin Walzer
Bruno Desthuilliers wrote: > Kevin Walzer a écrit : > > Note that if you go that way, neither Windows nor MacOS X are actually > able to cleanly manage such dependencies (which is why the usual > solution on these platforms - or at least on Windows - is to just bundle > everything in a single b

Re: Distributing programs depending on third party modules.

2007-05-16 Thread Tina I
David Boddie wrote: > On May 16, 7:44 am, Tina I <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> A binary would be ideal. I'll look into the freeze modules and >> Pyinstaller. Even if they don't handle huge things like Qt it would be a >> step in the right direction if it handles smaller third part modules. >> An

Re: Distributing programs depending on third party modules.

2007-05-16 Thread David Boddie
On May 16, 7:44 am, Tina I <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > A binary would be ideal. I'll look into the freeze modules and > Pyinstaller. Even if they don't handle huge things like Qt it would be a > step in the right direction if it handles smaller third part modules. > And maybe the smartest thing t

Re: Distributing programs depending on third party modules.

2007-05-16 Thread Bruno Desthuilliers
Kevin Walzer a écrit : > Bruno Desthuilliers wrote: > >>> What platform are you doing this on? On the Linux platform, >>> "dependency hell" of this sort is pretty much unavoidable, >> >> Yes it is. EasyInstall works just fine. > > You can install a beast like PyQt with easy_install? Meaning, tha

Re: Distributing programs depending on third party modules.

2007-05-15 Thread Tina I
Kevin Walzer wrote: > > What platform are you doing this on? On the Linux platform, "dependency > hell" of this sort is pretty much unavoidable, because there are so many > different packaging systems (apt, rpm, and so on): it's standard to let > the package manager handle these dependencies. A

Re: Distributing programs depending on third party modules.

2007-05-15 Thread Kevin Walzer
Bruno Desthuilliers wrote: >> What platform are you doing this on? On the Linux platform, >> "dependency hell" of this sort is pretty much unavoidable, > > Yes it is. EasyInstall works just fine. You can install a beast like PyQt with easy_install? Meaning, that it will download and build/inst

Re: Distributing programs depending on third party modules.

2007-05-15 Thread Bruno Desthuilliers
Kevin Walzer a écrit : > Tina I wrote: > >> Hi list, >> >> Is there a preferred way to distribute programs that depends on third >> party modules like PyQt, Beautifulsoup etc? I have used setuptools and >> just having the setup script check for the existence of the required >> modules. If they'

Re: Distributing programs depending on third party modules.

2007-05-15 Thread Kevin Walzer
Tina I wrote: > Hi list, > > Is there a preferred way to distribute programs that depends on third > party modules like PyQt, Beautifulsoup etc? I have used setuptools and > just having the setup script check for the existence of the required > modules. If they're not found I have it exit with

Re: Distributing programs depending on third party modules.

2007-05-15 Thread Bruno Desthuilliers
Tina I a écrit : > Hi list, > > Is there a preferred way to distribute programs that depends on third > party modules like PyQt, Beautifulsoup etc? I have used setuptools and > just having the setup script check for the existence of the required > modules. If they're not found I have it exit wi

Distributing programs depending on third party modules.

2007-05-15 Thread Tina I
Hi list, Is there a preferred way to distribute programs that depends on third party modules like PyQt, Beautifulsoup etc? I have used setuptools and just having the setup script check for the existence of the required modules. If they're not found I have it exit with a message that it need th

Re: Distributing programs

2005-10-04 Thread Magnus Lycka
Jason wrote: > A non-python programming friend of mine has said that any programs made > with Python must be distributed with, or an alternative link, to the > source of the program. > > Is this true? There seems to be some confusion regarding what you are asking. Are you asking about legal is

Re: Distributing programs

2005-10-02 Thread Steve Bergman
Wouter van Ooijen (www.voti.nl) wrote: >Yes, and you must also include a blank sheet, signed by you in blood. > > I thought you only had to do that if you were submitting a patch to MySQL, Qt, OpenOffice, or OpenSolaris. ;-) -Steve Bergman -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-li

Re: Distributing programs

2005-10-02 Thread Wouter van Ooijen (www.voti.nl)
>A non-python programming friend of mine has said that any programs made >with Python must be distributed with, or an alternative link, to the >source of the program. Yes, and you must also include a blank sheet, signed by you in blood. Seriously, whatever the license of Python itself is, a pro

Re: Distributing programs

2005-10-02 Thread Steve Bergman
Leif K-Brooks wrote: >But remember that Python bytecode can be easily decompiled with a >publicly-available program. > > I hope it is not considered too antisocial to bring it up here, but there is always PyObfuscate: http://www.lysator.liu.se/~astrand/projects/pyobfuscate/ -Steve Bergman --

Re: Distributing programs

2005-10-02 Thread Leif K-Brooks
Jeff Schwab wrote: > Sorta, but not really. Typically, you might distribute the source (.py) > files, but if you don't want to do that, you can distribute the > compiled .pyc files instead. Python creates these files automatically > when your modules are imported. But remember that Python bytec

Re: Distributing programs

2005-10-02 Thread Fredrik Lundh
> the license is here: > > http://www.python.org/doc/Copyright.html > >"Python is absolutely free, even for commercial use (including > resale). There is no GNU-like "copyleft" restriction." except that the current license is (no longer?) linked from that page. the current license is

Re: Distributing programs

2005-10-02 Thread Jeff Schwab
Jason wrote: > A non-python programming friend of mine has said that any programs made > with Python must be distributed with, or an alternative link, to the > source of the program. > > Is this true? Sorta, but not really. Typically, you might distribute the source (.py) files, but if you

Re: Distributing programs

2005-10-02 Thread Fredrik Lundh
Jason wrote: > A non-python programming friend of mine has said that any programs made > with Python must be distributed with, or an alternative link, to the source of > the program. > > Is this true? no. the license is here: http://www.python.org/doc/Copyright.html "Python is absolutel

Distributing programs

2005-10-02 Thread Jason
A non-python programming friend of mine has said that any programs made with Python must be distributed with, or an alternative link, to the source of the program. Is this true? -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list