[Pythonmac-SIG] My stab at a new page

[Bob Ippolito]

On Feb 11, 2006, at 2:50 PM, Charles Hartman wrote:

>
> On Feb 11, 2006, at 4:22 PM, Ronald Oussoren wrote:
>
>>
>> On 11-feb-2006, at 1:40, Charles Hartman wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> On Feb 10, 2006, at 5:31 PM, Bill Janssen wrote:
>>>
>>>> And how about bundling tcltkaqua into it, as well?
>>>
>>> Because some of us, at least, have no interest in tcl. I'm not  
>>> clear whether its presence interferes with wx (thing #421 that  
>>> I'm not clear about), but it doesn't help; why should I want it  
>>> on my system?
>>
>> Because _tkinter, and hence IDLE use it? IDLE seems to be the only  
>> ready-to-use acceptable Python IDE right now.
>
> I'm not very happy about that (and I don't know that anyone else  
> is, either; Bob I. has described some of the problems with IDLE),  
> but if it's the way it is it's the way it is. But here I am, a rank  
> beginner, I look at the descriptions of wxPython and its rivals and  
> decide I like wx -- can I install that, and begin building apps  
> with it, from IDLE?

Yes, assuming IDLE is started up and configured properly that will  
work fine.  IDLE is one of the few IDEs that is designed properly  
such that it runs scripts in a subprocess.

> We all seem to recognize the need for flexibility in preferences  
> about IDEs (since there's no clear, free, Mac-native choice). But  
> GUI libraries may be different. I feel it's important not to  
> foreclose the wx possibility, and I'm still not clear about what  
> that entails, though a recent post by Bob (which I can't find at  
> the moment) partially addressed this.

Huh?  wx possibility?  I'm totally confused, what relevance does wx  
have to any of this discussion?

>> Not that I want to bundle Tcl/Tk,
>
> --especially given the download/install overhead, right?

Yes, it's a few megs.  OS X 10.4 ships with it, so we don't have to  
include it -- just state that 10.3 users will need to acquire it  
separately.

-bob