[DOC-SIG] Postscript vs. PDF

[Jeff Rush]

On Fri, 21 Nov 1997 13:48:31 -0500 Guido wrote:

>> For the PC world, I'd propose:
>
>I can do the PC distributions but not PythonWin.  PythonWin (and Mark
>Hammond's other stuff like COM support and Active Scripting and
>Debugging) will be distributed separately, as add-ons.  But the core
>will be coming from me.

I agree that such platform-specific add-ons should be distributed separately.
However, that brings to mind a question -- why are Unix-variant modules (both
C and Python), such as the Irix 'al' module and the 'plat-xxx' dirs, included
in the base distribution when they are only usable by a subset of users?  Are
there any plans to 'streamline' the standard library, only keeping those modules
that are of general use to the majority and moving the others to add-on
distributions, which can also contain more package-specific documentation?

It would reduce the download size (a little), make it easier for someone
to step up and comprehend Python (when reading all of the sources like I did
during porting) and give Python a more focused look.

When doing the OS/2 port, it took time to wade through each C source file
deciding which were relevant/necessary to include in the core binary and which
were platform-specific or optional.  It also means the regression tester must
comprehend more modules.


>>     End-User Distribution:
>>         Platform-specific binaries and dyn extensions, standard library,
>>         and HTML documentation.
>
>Platform specific?  The only platforms I can currently support are
>Intel running Windows 95 or NT, and these can be one distribution.

I understand but what about the Mac version?  And then add one for OS/2 and
(soon) one for AmigaDOS.  And I assume a few Unix binaries as well.


>Agreed completely, with the proviso that the CNRI distribution won't
>contain a fancy IDE -- it will require youto use notepad (or whatever
>editor you chose for plain text) to edit .py files and run them in a
>DOS box.  It *will* support Tkinter, but you have to install Tcl/Tk
>separately (I can provide a link to the download though).

No argument here.  I don't care for fancy IDE's but I respect people who do.
I agree that such an IDE should be add-on, especially since there is no
standard GUI for Python, so an IDE would restrict it's portability.


>>     Full Developer Distribution:
>>         C sources, include files, standard library
>> 
>>     This package is for the developer who wants to totally rebuild Python
>>     and hence includes no binaries.  Such a developer will have diverse
>>     tastes in docs and will pick his flavor from one of the below:
>> 
>>     HTML Distribution:
>>         Only documentation
>> 
>>     PDF Distribution:
>>         Only documentation
>> 
>>     Postscript Distribution:
>>         Only documentation
>
>And these can be the same ones as for the Unix distribution, I
>presume.  WinZip can handle .tar.gz files just fine, so I don't see a
>big reason to distribute everything twice, once as .tar.gz and once as
>..zip.

Yes, the same ones as for Unix but remember, WinZip is only for Windows
platforms -- what about the others?  I have tar and gzip for OS/2 and
know how to use them but not everyone does.  Those tools also exist to
some degree for every known OS but we should try to remove as many
prerequisite tools as possible.  Most PC people are going to expect
ZIP files, I think.

However, the person who provides the platform-specific distribution
files can certainly untar the docs and repack them into suitable
forms for their platform.  Just leave a place for that on the web page.


>I also don't see a reason to make the documentation for Windows
>set different than the set for Unix, yet.

I'm not sure I ever see a reason for the docs to diverge, given
decent writing skills when preparing/updating them.


>> And as I said, I've willing to echo back any release in
>> platform-specific format.  I'd just like to see the platform
>> section on the main www.python.org page cleaned up a bit,
>> listing all platforms supported and giving an easy way to
>> download.  Right now you have to rummage around a bit in the
>> FTP area.
>
>A cleanup of python.org would indeed be most welcome.  Maybe in the
>new year, or when the Python Consortium takes off -- there simply
>aren't enough hours in the day to do the work (besides all the other
>stuff we do at CNRI).

Ever thought of outsourcing to some degree i.e. providing the storage
and control over distributions at CNRI as FTPable files *but* letting
the pretty web face be at Starship and volunteers write that?  I'd
like to help but I'm sure I can't get write access to CNRI's servers.
But I could set up pages elsewhere and -point- them to CNRI's files.

As you say, something to discuss in the new year...

Jeff Rush




_______________
DOC-SIG  - SIG for the Python Documentation Project

send messages to: doc-sig@python.org
administrivia to: doc-sig-request@python.org
_______________