[Bf-committers] Blender 2.5x beta status

[W. Scott Meador]

I vote for .dmg for the OSX version. See Firefox for how easy installation can 
be: 

http://www.mozilla.com/en-US/products/download.html?product=firefox-3.6.6&os=osx〈=en-US


Different topic - would love to see Blender package its libraries on Linux the 
way it does for OSX. Would make life easier for shared cluster use where 
installing libraries could break other researcher's apps.

Thanks,

Scott


Message: 7
Date: Wed, 14 Jul 2010 09:04:22 -0500
From: Mike Belanger <mikejamesbelanger at gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Bf-committers] Blender 2.5x beta status
To: bf-blender developers <bf-committers at blender.org>
Message-ID:
    <AANLkTilxXu6ojPhqYeXW0mn8ipmpYazOnWjJkAALfqIb at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-2

'If you are a real mac user, you use .dmg images very often,
since it's the way most apps do it, so why should this be confusing?'

If your ANY kind of real computer user, you've probably decompressed a .zip
file before.

On another note, PackageMaker.app *may* provide an easier installation, as
it chooses the directory for the user,
and it might be possible for it to check the environment, ie what version of
python, for the user.  However, its an extra step for builders, and takes
quite a while to package blender on my machine.

2010/7/14 Luke Frisken <l.frisken at gmail.com>

> There's really not much point trying to use something as complicated
> in computer usage terms as blender if one can't cope with the
> installation how it is now.
>
> On 7/14/10, Vilem Novak <pildanovak at post.cz> wrote:
> > If you are a real mac user, you use .dmg images very often,
> > since it's the way most apps do it, so why should this be confusing?
> > I guess I would rather be confused by a zip on mac.
> > as said, it takes the same amount of clicks.
> > So, my voice is for .dmg
> >