[Pharo-project] one-click is dead, now we have platform specific builds
tbh, one-click was just cool for mac users... windows and linux users (specially newcomers) where having bad reaction with the structure that the one-click enforces. The new scripts produces structures that can fit better into the platforms where they will run. You can check them here: http://files.pharo.org/platform/ of course, a lot of improvements are possible, this is just the first step :) Esteban
On 19 Mar 2013, at 18:29, Esteban Lorenzano <estebanlm@gmail.com> wrote:
tbh, one-click was just cool for mac users... windows and linux users (specially newcomers) where having bad reaction with the structure that the one-click enforces.
The new scripts produces structures that can fit better into the platforms where they will run.
You can check them here: http://files.pharo.org/platform/
of course, a lot of improvements are possible, this is just the first step :)
Esteban
Yes, excellent idea. Thanks for just doing it ;-) The One-Click concept was/is cool, but it is more a barrier than a solution it seems. Having a single download that 'just works' and feels native is very important. Sven
It is good for making OSX apps. For the rest, yeah, it is an alien creature. Phil 2013/3/19 Sven Van Caekenberghe <sven@stfx.eu>:
On 19 Mar 2013, at 18:29, Esteban Lorenzano <estebanlm@gmail.com> wrote:
tbh, one-click was just cool for mac users... windows and linux users (specially newcomers) where having bad reaction with the structure that the one-click enforces.
The new scripts produces structures that can fit better into the platforms where they will run.
You can check them here: http://files.pharo.org/platform/
of course, a lot of improvements are possible, this is just the first step :)
Esteban
Yes, excellent idea.
Thanks for just doing it ;-)
The One-Click concept was/is cool, but it is more a barrier than a solution it seems.
Having a single download that 'just works' and feels native is very important.
Sven
On 19/03/2013 18:49, phil@highoctane.be wrote:
It is good for making OSX apps. For the rest, yeah, it is an alien creature.
And even for OSX it is not well behaved - no program should write to its own app bundle, this has been true since the OS started as NextStep in 1989. All the Application bundle should be assume=d to be in a read only state possibly on a read only drive, On reason is to allow multiple users to use the same Application without overwriting each others work. . In 10.8 and with various setups (see Gatekeeper) the applications are signed to make sure no virus or anything else alter them, I note that Pharo is not signed and so I have to disable signed checks for all applications on OSX. For OSX what should probably happen is that the image is saved to ~/Library/Application Support, either by a stub program copying the image from the app bundle on first startup or by altering the save method
Thanks for just doing it ;-)
The One-Click concept was/is cool, but it is more a barrier than a solution it seems.
Having a single download that 'just works' and feels native is very important.
Sven Where is this just working download the pharo page <http://www.pharo-project.org/home> still has the one click image.
-- Mark
On Mar 23, 2013, at 3:24 PM, Mark Bestley <news@bestley.co.uk> wrote:
On 19/03/2013 18:49, phil@highoctane.be wrote:
It is good for making OSX apps. For the rest, yeah, it is an alien creature.
And even for OSX it is not well behaved - no program should write to its own app bundle, this has been true since the OS started as NextStep in 1989. All the Application bundle should be assume=d to be in a read only state possibly on a read only drive, On reason is to allow multiple users to use the same Application without overwriting each others work. . In 10.8 and with various setups (see Gatekeeper) the applications are signed to make sure no virus or anything else alter them, I note that Pharo is not signed and so I have to disable signed checks for all applications on OSX.
For OSX what should probably happen is that the image is saved to ~/Library/Application Support, either by a stub program copying the image from the app bundle on first startup or by altering the save method
Yes, this is why we are going away from the One-Click concept. The idea is that you install "Pharo2" or "Pharo3" or "Pharo4" on you system, like any Application. This means for windows, there will be an installer, for Mac it might be in the App Store even. This Pharo Application is the VM and *read only* image. When you start Pharo it will open this image and ask you to save it to your home dir. This will take some time until we reach there, though. (There are some details that I omitted⦠I should write a document for what is planed exactly)
Where is this just working download the pharo page <http://www.pharo-project.org/home> still has the one click image.
Yes, we released 2.0 on Monday. On Tuesday we made a first step into the future direction of how Pharo will be distributed. As 2.0 is released, this is for the next development phase (Pharo3): http://www.pharo-project.org/pharo-download/alpha-3-0 We might back=port it, but keep in mind that our resources are limited and we need to carefully assess where to spend time. Marcus
On 23 Mar 2013, at 15:31, Marcus Denker wrote:
On Mar 23, 2013, at 3:24 PM, Mark Bestley <news@bestley.co.uk> wrote:
This means for windows, there will be an installer, for Mac it might be in the App Store even.
Please, please, please do not support the App Store. It is a rotten freedom stealing idea. Additionally, Apple does not know better than I what software I want on my machine; and incidentally, has no business knowing what software I run either. Dennis -- [Dennis Groves](http://about.me/dennis.groves), MSc [Email me](mailto:dennis.groves@owasp.org) or [schedule a meeting](http://goo.gl/8sPIy). *This email is licensed under a [CC BY-ND 3.0](http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/3.0/deed.en_GB) license.* **Please do not send me Microsoft Office/Apple iWork documents.** Send [OpenDocument](http://fsf.org/campaigns/opendocument/) instead! Stand up for your freedom to install [free software](http://www.fsf.org/campaigns/secure-boot/statement).
The idea that some lives matter less is the root of all thatâs wrong with the world. -- Paul Farmer
2013/3/23 Marcus Denker <marcus.denker@inria.fr>:
Yes, this is why we are going away from the One-Click concept.
The idea is that you install "Pharo2" or "Pharo3" or "Pharo4" on you system, like any Application.
This means for windows, there will be an installer, for Mac it might be in the App Store even.
This Pharo Application is the VM and *read only* image. When you start Pharo it will open this image and ask you to save it to your home dir.
Great! That is what Dolphin Smalltalk has been doing since version 4, it installs to the shared location, and in the first run it copies the image to your documents folder (by default). Although I'm ok with "portable" way of doing it, it is better to be able to have the executable in a common location. That will enable Windows users to download "pharo" (and then predefined VM's), or run stuff like "apt-get install pharo-vm" Regards!
I have been putting pharo under /usr/local/pharo with bin/ and image/ under that. bin/ contains vm.sh and vm-ui.sh (when using, I think it would be better to have vm.sh only and vm.sh -ui as an option instead of two files. Also, vm.sh isn't too cool a name and I made aliases: alias pharo='/usr/local/pharo/bin/vm-ui.sh' alias pharo14='/usr/local/pharo/bin/vm-ui.sh /usr/local/pharo/image/14/Pharo-1.4.image' alias pharo20='/usr/local/pharo/bin/vm-ui.sh /usr/local/pharo/image/20/Pharo.image' alias pharocli='/usr/local/pharo/bin/vm.sh' in image/, there are 14/ and 20/ where I put the images accordingly as you can see in the aliases. The image/ folder is all read only. That"s one step further for a kind of apt-get packaging :) Phil 2013/3/24 Esteban A. Maringolo <emaringolo@gmail.com>:
2013/3/23 Marcus Denker <marcus.denker@inria.fr>:
Yes, this is why we are going away from the One-Click concept.
The idea is that you install "Pharo2" or "Pharo3" or "Pharo4" on you system, like any Application.
This means for windows, there will be an installer, for Mac it might be in the App Store even.
This Pharo Application is the VM and *read only* image. When you start Pharo it will open this image and ask you to save it to your home dir.
Great!
That is what Dolphin Smalltalk has been doing since version 4, it installs to the shared location, and in the first run it copies the image to your documents folder (by default).
Although I'm ok with "portable" way of doing it, it is better to be able to have the executable in a common location. That will enable Windows users to download "pharo" (and then predefined VM's), or run stuff like "apt-get install pharo-vm"
Regards!
Mark Bestley wrote
For OSX what should probably happen is that the image is saved to ~/Library/Application Support
That doesn't sound right to me. How about the use case where I have a portable image on a USB stick? I don't want to make a local copy of the image, just run it. I get putting the VM in a shared predictable location, but why the image? How does one then keep multiple Pharo 2.0's on the same computer? ----- Cheers, Sean -- View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/one-click-is-dead-now-we-have-platform-specific-builds... Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
On Mar 24, 2013, at 10:40 AM, "Sean P. DeNigris" <sean@clipperadams.com> wrote:
Mark Bestley wrote
For OSX what should probably happen is that the image is saved to ~/Library/Application Support
That doesn't sound right to me. How about the use case where I have a portable image on a USB stick? I don't want to make a local copy of the image, just run it. I get putting the VM in a shared predictable location, but why the image? How does one then keep multiple Pharo 2.0's on the same computer?
We will not do it like this. What is planned is that the "Pharo installation" contains a template (read only). When you open the template, it will ask you to save the image to your home directory. Images are like documents, it should be very easy to have a lot of them. I should write down what is the plan⦠sadly I have too much else to do, so this will take a while. Marcus
On 24/03/2013 09:43, Marcus Denker wrote:
On Mar 24, 2013, at 10:40 AM, "Sean P. DeNigris" <sean@clipperadams.com> wrote:
Mark Bestley wrote
For OSX what should probably happen is that the image is saved to ~/Library/Application Support
That doesn't sound right to me. How about the use case where I have a portable image on a USB stick? I don't want to make a local copy of the image, just run it. I get putting the VM in a shared predictable location, but why the image? How does one then keep multiple Pharo 2.0's on the same computer?
This depends on on view of using the OS. For portable images etc the the image can go anywhere. To fully fit in with Apple's OS paths then yes data should be in a given place (rereading <http://developer.apple.com/library/mac/#documentation/FileManagement/Concept...> suggests it should be ~/Documents) That that just gives the directory path - the images can be named differently to allow many of them. (On OSX I suppose there is also a case that the image and change files etc. all should be saved in a directory that could be marked as a bundle) I have used images on Dropbox (which forces a different directory ~/Dropbox in OSX and elsewhere on Windows) to move between my machines.
We will not do it like this.
What is planned is that the "Pharo installation" contains a template (read only). When you open the template, it will ask you to save the image to your home directory.
Makes sense for the different possible usages. Although for OSX should be ~/Documents or possible ~/Application\ Support/... for the first case, then probably best the last directory used.
Images are like documents, it should be very easy to have a lot of them.
I should write down what is the plan⦠sadly I have too much else to do, so this will take a while.
On Mar 24, 2013, at 10:43 AM, Marcus Denker <marcus.denker@inria.fr> wrote:
On Mar 24, 2013, at 10:40 AM, "Sean P. DeNigris" <sean@clipperadams.com> wrote:
Mark Bestley wrote
For OSX what should probably happen is that the image is saved to ~/Library/Application Support
That doesn't sound right to me. How about the use case where I have a portable image on a USB stick? I don't want to make a local copy of the image, just run it. I get putting the VM in a shared predictable location, but why the image? How does one then keep multiple Pharo 2.0's on the same computer?
We will not do it like this.
What is planned is that the "Pharo installation" contains a template (read only). When you open the template, it will ask you to save the image to your home directory.
Images are like documents, it should be very easy to have a lot of them.
why should we decide where people should put them. I put the images where I want them to be.
I should write down what is the plan⦠sadly I have too much else to do, so this will take a while.
Marcus
On Mar 24, 2013, at 4:31 PM, Stéphane Ducasse <stephane.ducasse@inria.fr> wrote:
On Mar 24, 2013, at 10:43 AM, Marcus Denker <marcus.denker@inria.fr> wrote:
On Mar 24, 2013, at 10:40 AM, "Sean P. DeNigris" <sean@clipperadams.com> wrote:
Mark Bestley wrote
For OSX what should probably happen is that the image is saved to ~/Library/Application Support
That doesn't sound right to me. How about the use case where I have a portable image on a USB stick? I don't want to make a local copy of the image, just run it. I get putting the VM in a shared predictable location, but why the image? How does one then keep multiple Pharo 2.0's on the same computer?
We will not do it like this.
What is planned is that the "Pharo installation" contains a template (read only). When you open the template, it will ask you to save the image to your home directory.
Images are like documents, it should be very easy to have a lot of them.
why should we decide where people should put them. I put the images where I want them to be.
exactly. Nobody tells me where to put my .keynote files, either. Marcus
Stéphane Ducasse wrote:
On Mar 24, 2013, at 10:43 AM, Marcus Denker <marcus.denker@inria.fr> wrote:
On Mar 24, 2013, at 10:40 AM, "Sean P. DeNigris" <sean@clipperadams.com> wrote:
Mark Bestley wrote
For OSX what should probably happen is that the image is saved to ~/Library/Application Support
That doesn't sound right to me. How about the use case where I have a portable image on a USB stick? I don't want to make a local copy of the image, just run it. I get putting the VM in a shared predictable location, but why the image? How does one then keep multiple Pharo 2.0's on the same computer?
We will not do it like this.
What is planned is that the "Pharo installation" contains a template (read only). When you open the template, it will ask you to save the image to your home directory.
Images are like documents, it should be very easy to have a lot of them.
why should we decide where people should put them. I put the images where I want them to be.
Because corporate system administrators expect programs to put things in the "correct" locations as defined by the OS vendor. This helps OS platform certification and even if you don't go that far, it lends an air of professionalism. It only needs to be a default.
I should write down what is the plan⦠sadly I have too much else to do, so this will take a while.
Marcus
On 24/03/2013 17:19, Ben Coman wrote:
Stéphane Ducasse wrote:
On Mar 24, 2013, at 10:43 AM, Marcus Denker <marcus.denker@inria.fr> wrote:
On Mar 24, 2013, at 10:40 AM, "Sean P. DeNigris" <sean@clipperadams.com> wrote:
Mark Bestley wrote
For OSX what should probably happen is that the image is saved to ~/Library/Application Support That doesn't sound right to me. How about the use case where I have a portable image on a USB stick? I don't want to make a local copy of the image, just run it. I get putting the VM in a shared predictable location, but why the image? How does one then keep multiple Pharo 2.0's on the same computer? We will not do it like this.
What is planned is that the "Pharo installation" contains a template (read only). When you open the template, it will ask you to save the image to your home directory.
Images are like documents, it should be very easy to have a lot of them.
why should we decide where people should put them. I put the images where I want them to be.
You have learnt where you want them to be. The defaults are for a user who does not know where to put them. As well as the following ...
Because corporate system administrators expect programs to put things in the "correct" locations as defined by the OS vendor. This helps OS platform certification and even if you don't go that far, it lends an air of professionalism.
It only needs to be a default.
I was only suggesting this as a default. It also helps new users so that when they ask for help with OS related stuff elsewhere Pharo appears to act like a normal OS program, this would help to limit the number of responses like the original article where Pharo did not fit in with what was expected by the user of the Operating system. However the freedom to do what ever is wanted should be kept as well.
I should write down what is the plan⦠sadly I have too much else to do, so this will take a while.
Marcus
You are probably right. Now we are all underestimating the amount of energy that we spend on addressing stupid/boring/idiot issues that unfortunately must be done. Yes esteban, marcus and Igor I know you know. I think that in general we do not value these little issues, we believe that somebody will address them, and of course for free (because this is open-source). Now we will see if the community succeeds to understand that because we have the consortium and the association but may be they will not succeed (but not because we did not put energy into it). Stef
On Mar 24, 2013, at 10:40 AM, "Sean P. DeNigris" <sean@clipperadams.com> wrote:
Mark Bestley wrote
For OSX what should probably happen is that the image is saved to ~/Library/Application Support That doesn't sound right to me. How about the use case where I have a portable image on a USB stick? I don't want to make a local copy of the image, just run it. I get putting the VM in a shared predictable location, but why the image? How does one then keep multiple Pharo 2.0's on the same computer? We will not do it like this.
What is planned is that the "Pharo installation" contains a template (read only). When you open the template, it will ask you to save the image to your home directory.
Images are like documents, it should be very easy to have a lot of them.
why should we decide where people should put them. I put the images where I want them to be.
You have learnt where you want them to be. The defaults are for a user who does not know where to put them. As well as the following ...
Because corporate system administrators expect programs to put things in the "correct" locations as defined by the OS vendor. This helps OS platform certification and even if you don't go that far, it lends an air of professionalism.
It only needs to be a default.
I was only suggesting this as a default. It also helps new users so that when they ask for help with OS related stuff elsewhere Pharo appears to act like a normal OS program, this would help to limit the number of responses like the original article where Pharo did not fit in with what was expected by the user of the Operating system.
However the freedom to do what ever is wanted should be kept as well.
I should write down what is the plan⦠sadly I have too much else to do, so this will take a while.
Marcus
Sven Van Caekenberghe wrote:
On 19 Mar 2013, at 18:29, Esteban Lorenzano <estebanlm@gmail.com> wrote:
tbh, one-click was just cool for mac users... windows and linux users (specially newcomers) where having bad reaction with the structure that the one-click enforces.
The new scripts produces structures that can fit better into the platforms where they will run.
You can check them here: http://files.pharo.org/platform/
of course, a lot of improvements are possible, this is just the first step :)
Esteban
Yes, excellent idea.
Thanks for just doing it ;-)
The One-Click concept was/is cool, but it is more a barrier than a solution it seems.
Having a single download that 'just works' and feels native is very important.
Sven
However I guess that compared to having to download image & VM separately, it is still a one-click - but platform specific rather than multi-platform. cheers -ben
Great! Is there a possibility to custom Pharo images (such as Moose) with your infrastructure? Cheers, Doru On Mar 19, 2013, at 6:29 PM, Esteban Lorenzano <estebanlm@gmail.com> wrote:
tbh, one-click was just cool for mac users... windows and linux users (specially newcomers) where having bad reaction with the structure that the one-click enforces.
The new scripts produces structures that can fit better into the platforms where they will run.
You can check them here: http://files.pharo.org/platform/
of course, a lot of improvements are possible, this is just the first step :)
Esteban
-- www.tudorgirba.com "What we can governs what we wish."
sure... I just adapted the script for create one-click. If you already do that for moose, is more or less the same: you need to clone from https://gitorious.org/pharo-build and then execute something like this: bash build-platform.sh -i image/Pharo -o Pharo3.0 -v 3.0 -t Pharo -p mac (obviously with your image and names and output names) Esteban On Mar 19, 2013, at 9:52 PM, Tudor Girba <tudor@tudorgirba.com> wrote:
Great!
Is there a possibility to custom Pharo images (such as Moose) with your infrastructure?
Cheers, Doru
On Mar 19, 2013, at 6:29 PM, Esteban Lorenzano <estebanlm@gmail.com> wrote:
tbh, one-click was just cool for mac users... windows and linux users (specially newcomers) where having bad reaction with the structure that the one-click enforces.
The new scripts produces structures that can fit better into the platforms where they will run.
You can check them here: http://files.pharo.org/platform/
of course, a lot of improvements are possible, this is just the first step :)
Esteban
-- www.tudorgirba.com
"What we can governs what we wish."
EstebanLM wrote
I just adapted the script for create one-click
Have we captured the procedure for the one-click? Even though it didn't work out for newbies, I think it has value in other contexts e.g. a personal image that I can easily start up on any OS, perhaps to show off at conferences ;) ----- Cheers, Sean -- View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/one-click-is-dead-now-we-have-platform-specific-builds... Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Hi Sean, yes, the procedure is still there, and it is still possible to produce one-click distributions... maybe we could produce a "portable" version (I think the portable concept captures better what a one-click is... because a one click is not a one click, you still need to double click on it :D ) Esteban On Mar 20, 2013, at 12:43 PM, "Sean P. DeNigris" <sean@clipperadams.com> wrote:
EstebanLM wrote
I just adapted the script for create one-click
Have we captured the procedure for the one-click? Even though it didn't work out for newbies, I think it has value in other contexts e.g. a personal image that I can easily start up on any OS, perhaps to show off at conferences ;)
----- Cheers, Sean -- View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/one-click-is-dead-now-we-have-platform-specific-builds... Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
That might be a smart marketing move. PortableApps have become quite popular, and are an advantage within a locked down corporate environment. It is a term people are familiar with and that helps newcomers comfort level. -ben Esteban Lorenzano wrote:
Hi Sean,
yes, the procedure is still there, and it is still possible to produce one-click distributions... maybe we could produce a "portable" version (I think the portable concept captures better what a one-click is... because a one click is not a one click, you still need to double click on it :D )
Esteban
On Mar 20, 2013, at 12:43 PM, "Sean P. DeNigris" <sean@clipperadams.com> wrote:
EstebanLM wrote
I just adapted the script for create one-click
Have we captured the procedure for the one-click? Even though it didn't work out for newbies, I think it has value in other contexts e.g. a personal image that I can easily start up on any OS, perhaps to show off at conferences ;)
----- Cheers, Sean -- View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/one-click-is-dead-now-we-have-platform-specific-builds... Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
On 21 Mar 2013, at 13:22, Ben Coman wrote:
That might be a smart marketing move. PortableApps have become quite popular, and are an advantage within a locked down corporate environment. It is a term people are familiar with and that helps newcomers comfort level.
This is why I like it, I can throw it on my USB and have it run anywhere - my tools go with me where ever I need them. :-) -- [Dennis Groves](http://about.me/dennis.groves), MSc [Email me](mailto:dennis.groves@owasp.org) or [schedule a meeting](http://goo.gl/8sPIy). *This email is licensed under a [CC BY-ND 3.0](http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/3.0/deed.en_GB) license.* **Please do not send me Microsoft Office/Apple iWork documents.** Send [OpenDocument](http://fsf.org/campaigns/opendocument/) instead! Stand up for your freedom to install [free software](http://www.fsf.org/campaigns/secure-boot/statement).
The idea that some lives matter less is the root of all thatâs wrong with the world. -- Paul Farmer
Dennis Groves wrote
yes, the procedure is still there, and it is still possible to produce one-click distributions... maybe we could produce a "portable" version (I think the portable concept captures better what a one-click is... because a one click is not a one click, you still need to double click on it :D )
That might be a smart marketing move. PortableApps have become quite popular, and are an advantage within a locked down corporate environment. It is a term people are familiar with and that helps newcomers comfort level.
This is why I like it, I can throw it on my USB and have it run anywhere - my tools go with me where ever I need them. :-)
Yes, keeping the formerly-known-as-one-click version as a "portable" version would be very nice. I am currently carrying one with me on a usb-stick between my mac and other peoples windows pcs. This works very well. -- View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/one-click-is-dead-now-we-have-platform-specific-builds... Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Hi Sean, yes, the procedure is still there, and it is still possible to produce one-click distributions... maybe we could produce a "portable" version (I think the portable concept captures better what a one-click is... because a one click is not a one click, you still need to double click on it :D )
"One-click" in this context generally means "one stop". It could involve a few clicks and/or gestures, but the important meaning is there is only one initial place from which the software is installed and not having to, for example, pre-install something else first. So, from that aspect, neither Squeak nor Pharo is one-click on 64-bit Linux because one has to install the 32-bit libs first. :(
Great. I will give it a try. Doru On Mar 20, 2013, at 11:07 AM, Esteban Lorenzano <estebanlm@gmail.com> wrote:
sure... I just adapted the script for create one-click. If you already do that for moose, is more or less the same:
you need to clone from
https://gitorious.org/pharo-build
and then execute something like this:
bash build-platform.sh -i image/Pharo -o Pharo3.0 -v 3.0 -t Pharo -p mac
(obviously with your image and names and output names)
Esteban
On Mar 19, 2013, at 9:52 PM, Tudor Girba <tudor@tudorgirba.com> wrote:
Great!
Is there a possibility to custom Pharo images (such as Moose) with your infrastructure?
Cheers, Doru
On Mar 19, 2013, at 6:29 PM, Esteban Lorenzano <estebanlm@gmail.com> wrote:
tbh, one-click was just cool for mac users... windows and linux users (specially newcomers) where having bad reaction with the structure that the one-click enforces.
The new scripts produces structures that can fit better into the platforms where they will run.
You can check them here: http://files.pharo.org/platform/
of course, a lot of improvements are possible, this is just the first step :)
Esteban
-- www.tudorgirba.com
"What we can governs what we wish."
-- www.tudorgirba.com "Things happen when they happen, not when you talk about them happening."
To whom it may concern, **I have an opinion:** I for one prefer the one-click on OSX. It just fits into the environment better. **I have a bug:** However, after several days of it not working and lots, and lots of help on IRC we have discovered the reason that the one-click did not work on my Mac is because the filesystem is case sensitive. Thus the plist file specifies an incorrect binary as 'pharo' when it needs to be 'Pharo' this is true for the 3.0 branch as well. Cheers, Dennis -- [Dennis Groves](http://about.me/dennis.groves), MSc [Email me](mailto:dennis.groves@owasp.org) or [schedule a meeting](http://goo.gl/8sPIy). *This email is licensed under a [CC BY-ND 3.0](http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/3.0/deed.en_GB) license.* **Please do not send me Microsoft Office/Apple iWork documents.** Send [OpenDocument](http://fsf.org/campaigns/opendocument/) instead! Stand up for your freedom to install [free software](http://www.fsf.org/campaigns/secure-boot/statement).
The idea that some lives matter less is the root of all thatâs wrong with the world. -- Paul Farmer
On 20.03.2013, at 22:54, "Dennis Groves" <dennis.groves@gmail.com> wrote:
To whom it may concern,
I have an opinion: I for one prefer the one-click on OSX. It just fits into the environment better.
Did you try the macos version of the non-oneclick? It is the same as before, minus the windows and linux binaries.
I have a bug: However, after several days of it not working and lots, and lots of help on IRC we have discovered the reason that the one-click did not work on my Mac is because the filesystem is case sensitive. Thus the plist file specifies an incorrect binary as 'pharo' when it needs to be 'Pharo' this is true for the 3.0 branch as well.
can you add a issue tracker entry?
Cheers,
Dennis
Dennis Groves, MSc Email me or schedule a meeting.
This email is licensed under a CC BY-ND 3.0 license.
Please do not send me Microsoft Office/Apple iWork documents. Send OpenDocument instead! Stand up for your freedom to install free software.
The idea that some lives matter less is the root of all thatâs wrong with the world. -- Paul Farmer
On 2013-03-21, at 06:41, Marcus Denker <marcus.denker@gmail.com> wrote:
On 20.03.2013, at 22:54, "Dennis Groves" <dennis.groves@gmail.com> wrote:
To whom it may concern,
I have an opinion: I for one prefer the one-click on OSX. It just fits into the environment better.
Did you try the macos version of the non-oneclick? It is the same as before, minus the windows and linux binaries.
I have a bug: However, after several days of it not working and lots, and lots of help on IRC we have discovered the reason that the one-click did not work on my Mac is because the filesystem is case sensitive. Thus the plist file specifies an incorrect binary as 'pharo' when it needs to be 'Pharo' this is true for the 3.0 branch as well.
can you add a issue tracker entry?
yes I already reported it: https://pharo.fogbugz.com/default.asp?10062#72825
On 21 Mar 2013, at 8:08, Camillo Bruni wrote:
can you add a issue tracker entry?
yes I already reported it:
Thank you, I haven't ever used fogbugz before, as I tend to avoid all non-open source software. :-) Dennis -- [Dennis Groves](http://about.me/dennis.groves), MSc [Email me](mailto:dennis.groves@owasp.org) or [schedule a meeting](http://goo.gl/8sPIy). *This email is licensed under a [CC BY-ND 3.0](http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/3.0/deed.en_GB) license.* **Please do not send me Microsoft Office/Apple iWork documents.** Send [OpenDocument](http://fsf.org/campaigns/opendocument/) instead! Stand up for your freedom to install [free software](http://www.fsf.org/campaigns/secure-boot/statement).
The idea that some lives matter less is the root of all thatâs wrong with the world. -- Paul Farmer
On Mar 21, 2013, at 1:19 PM, Dennis Groves <dennis.groves@gmail.com> wrote:
On 21 Mar 2013, at 8:08, Camillo Bruni wrote:
can you add a issue tracker entry?
yes I already reported it:
Thank you,
I haven't ever used fogbugz before, as I tend to avoid all non-open source software. :-)
:) us too but having a professional tool is nice too. Now google tracker was not open-source and worse they closed their api (amazing). Stef
On 21 Mar 2013, at 5:41, Marcus Denker wrote:
On 20.03.2013, at 22:54, "Dennis Groves" <dennis.groves@gmail.com> wrote:
To whom it may concern,
I have an opinion: I for one prefer the one-click on OSX. It just fits into the environment better.
Did you try the macos version of the non-oneclick? It is the same as before, minus the windows and linux binaries.
3.0 works quite nicely after I perform the edit described in my bug. :-) Dennis -- [Dennis Groves](http://about.me/dennis.groves), MSc [Email me](mailto:dennis.groves@owasp.org) or [schedule a meeting](http://goo.gl/8sPIy). *This email is licensed under a [CC BY-ND 3.0](http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/3.0/deed.en_GB) license.* **Please do not send me Microsoft Office/Apple iWork documents.** Send [OpenDocument](http://fsf.org/campaigns/opendocument/) instead! Stand up for your freedom to install [free software](http://www.fsf.org/campaigns/secure-boot/statement).
The idea that some lives matter less is the root of all thatâs wrong with the world. -- Paul Farmer
thanks esteban this is indeed a real progress On Mar 19, 2013, at 6:29 PM, Esteban Lorenzano <estebanlm@gmail.com> wrote:
tbh, one-click was just cool for mac users... windows and linux users (specially newcomers) where having bad reaction with the structure that the one-click enforces.
The new scripts produces structures that can fit better into the platforms where they will run.
You can check them here: http://files.pharo.org/platform/
of course, a lot of improvements are possible, this is just the first step :)
Esteban
Clean! On Tue, Mar 19, 2013 at 10:29 AM, Esteban Lorenzano <estebanlm@gmail.com> wrote:
tbh, one-click was just cool for mac users... windows and linux users (specially newcomers) where having bad reaction with the structure that the one-click enforces.
The new scripts produces structures that can fit better into the platforms where they will run.
You can check them here: http://files.pharo.org/platform/
of course, a lot of improvements are possible, this is just the first step :)
Esteban
Hi Esteban--
windows and linux users (specially newcomers) where having bad reaction with the structure that the one-click enforces.
I'm interested in the details. Are they documented somewhere, or can you enumerate here? thanks! -C -- Craig Latta www.netjam.org/resume +31 6 2757 7177 (SMS ok) + 1 415 287 3547 (no SMS)
On 20 March 2013 10:45, Craig Latta <craig@netjam.org> wrote:
Hi Esteban--
windows and linux users (specially newcomers) where having bad reaction with the structure that the one-click enforces.
I'm interested in the details. Are they documented somewhere, or can you enumerate here?
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5395496 describes one newbie's first impressions of the all-in-one approach. frank
thanks!
-C
-- Craig Latta www.netjam.org/resume +31 6 2757 7177 (SMS ok) + 1 415 287 3547 (no SMS)
windows and linux users (specially newcomers) where having bad reaction with the structure that the one-click enforces.
I'm interested in the details. Are they documented somewhere, or can you enumerate here?
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5395496 describes one newbie's first impressions of the all-in-one approach.
Hmm, I've got to wonder whether, if it had actually _worked_ the first time for him, whether he'd have written those negative comments at all. I mean, at first he actually wrote: "I was excited to get started, so I figured I could download the "one-click" for version 1.4 and get started right away." At that point, he had no problems with the _idea_ of one-click. It later seemed it was only the implementation he didn't like. I'm interested in the topic of app-accessibility, and that's why I'm really parsing his words and trying to understand. Since he also wrote: "...and it definitely doesn't show that the developers know how to properly distribute their software for multiple platforms..." I wish he'd have enlightened us all, WHAT is the the way to properly distribute one's software for multiple platforms besides the browser..
On 21 March 2013 21:09, Chris Muller <asqueaker@gmail.com> wrote:
windows and linux users (specially newcomers) where having bad reaction with the structure that the one-click enforces.
I'm interested in the details. Are they documented somewhere, or can you enumerate here?
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5395496 describes one newbie's first impressions of the all-in-one approach.
Hmm, I've got to wonder whether, if it had actually _worked_ the first time for him, whether he'd have written those negative comments at all. I mean, at first he actually wrote:
"I was excited to get started, so I figured I could download the "one-click" for version 1.4 and get started right away."
At that point, he had no problems with the _idea_ of one-click. It later seemed it was only the implementation he didn't like.
I'm interested in the topic of app-accessibility, and that's why I'm really parsing his words and trying to understand. Since he also wrote:
"...and it definitely doesn't show that the developers know how to properly distribute their software for multiple platforms..."
I wish he'd have enlightened us all, WHAT is the the way to properly distribute one's software for multiple platforms besides the browser..
i can tell you how: - we should distribute an xml file, with .jnlp extension :) (of course, you will need java run time already installed on your platform, but who cannot install it? it is just a couple of clicks on java.com site ;) -- Best regards, Igor Stasenko.
Hmm, I've got to wonder whether, if it had actually _worked_ the first time for him, whether he'd have written those negative comments at all. I mean, at first he actually wrote:
"I was excited to get started, so I figured I could download the "one-click" for version 1.4 and get started right away."
At that point, he had no problems with the _idea_ of one-click. It later seemed it was only the implementation he didn't like.
I'm interested in the topic of app-accessibility, and that's why I'm really parsing his words and trying to understand. Since he also wrote:
"...and it definitely doesn't show that the developers know how to properly distribute their software for multiple platforms..."
I wish he'd have enlightened us all, WHAT is the the way to properly distribute one's software for multiple platforms besides the browser..
:) talking and ranting is easier than doing syndrome as usual :). Stef
First rule for open source projects: The Customer is always right even if he doesn't pay for the product!! On 22 March 2013 20:26, stephane ducasse <stephane.ducasse@free.fr> wrote:
Hmm, I've got to wonder whether, if it had actually _worked_ the first time for him, whether he'd have written those negative comments at all. I mean, at first he actually wrote:
"I was excited to get started, so I figured I could download the "one-click" for version 1.4 and get started right away."
At that point, he had no problems with the _idea_ of one-click. It later seemed it was only the implementation he didn't like.
I'm interested in the topic of app-accessibility, and that's why I'm really parsing his words and trying to understand. Since he also wrote:
"...and it definitely doesn't show that the developers know how to properly distribute their software for multiple platforms..."
I wish he'd have enlightened us all, WHAT is the the way to properly distribute one's software for multiple platforms besides the browser..
:)
talking and ranting is easier than doing syndrome as usual :).
Stef
-- Frank Church ======================= http://devblog.brahmancreations.com
2013/3/23 Frank Church <vfclists@gmail.com>:
First rule for open source projects:
The Customer is always right even if he doesn't pay for the product!!
I wouldn't say right, but at least I'd hear what he has to say. Outsiders usually have the best feedback because they don't have any attachment with the product and/or community. Regards!
I think it relates to the thread on Hacker News. In particular: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5395496 -- View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/one-click-is-dead-now-we-have-platform-specific-builds... Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
participants (22)
-
Ben Coman -
blake -
Camillo Bruni -
Chris Muller -
Craig Latta -
Dennis Groves -
Esteban A. Maringolo -
Esteban Lorenzano -
Frank Church -
Frank Shearar -
Igor Stasenko -
Marcus Denker -
Marcus Denker -
Mark Bestley -
MartinW -
phil＠highoctane.be -
Sean P. DeNigris -
Stan Shepherd -
stephane ducasse -
Stéphane Ducasse -
Sven Van Caekenberghe -
Tudor Girba