One-click images

It appears one-click images are a barrier to entry, if you look at the
Hacker News comments around Pharo 2.0's release announcement.

(Mental note to add this as a Release Manager item.)

frank

On 2013-03-19, at 18:58, Frank Shearar <[hidden email]> wrote:

> It appears one-click images are a barrier to entry, if you look at the
> Hacker News comments around Pharo 2.0's release announcement.
>
> (Mental note to add this as a Release Manager item.)


You mean
        https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5393553

That comment was more about it not working on 64 bit Linux, no?

But I agree in general, that one-size-fits-all is not ideal. At least it should be cleaned up - seeing all the Windows VM files in the unzipped directory is ugly, having all the Mac plugins in the image directory is ugly, having deep nesting in the Linux VM is ugly, and not being able to see the image because it is hidden on the Mac is ugly, too.

The all-in-one directory structure was meant for apps, not for the development environment. And "one-click image" is particularly misleading. Thread subject changed ;)

Now with the build server it should be easy to build platform-specific zip files, no? We just need an idea how the result *should* look like for each platform.

- Bert -

On 19 March 2013 18:34, Bert Freudenberg <[hidden email]> wrote:
Thanks. I couldn't summon the Google-fu to find the news article. I
actually mean https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5395496 where a CS
student struggled through trying to find out how to run the One-Click.

> That comment was more about it not working on 64 bit Linux, no?
>
> But I agree in general, that one-size-fits-all is not ideal. At least it should be cleaned up - seeing all the Windows VM files in the unzipped directory is ugly, having all the Mac plugins in the image directory is ugly, having deep nesting in the Linux VM is ugly, and not being able to see the image because it is hidden on the Mac is ugly, too.
>
> The all-in-one directory structure was meant for apps, not for the development environment. And "one-click image" is particularly misleading. Thread subject changed ;)

Er yes. That's much better.

> Now with the build server it should be easy to build platform-specific zip files, no? We just need an idea how the result *should* look like for each platform.

Absolutely. ReleaseSqueakTrunk just needs to assemble the right bits
and we'll have exactly what we want, for the major platforms at least.

One important thing that we don't have in place is testing the created
artifacts. For a long time ReleaseSqueakTrunk's artifact (a zipball
with the latest image in it) was broken because some silly person
*cough* me *cough* didn't test it. But, I guess, that could be a test
in that build. At least that could test the Linux platform thing:
unpack, run the image with a simple 3+4 script, see the 7 on stdout.

frank

I'm curious about that; I searched but couldn't find the discussion,
what was the reason someone said they don't like one-click images?

Oh wait, I was thinking of All-In-One.zip, is that the same thing?


On Tue, Mar 19, 2013 at 12:58 PM, Frank Shearar <[hidden email]> wrote:
> It appears one-click images are a barrier to entry, if you look at the
> Hacker News comments around Pharo 2.0's release announcement.
>
> (Mental note to add this as a Release Manager item.)
>
> frank
>

Bert kindly corrected my terminology usage :) Yes, the person's
struggle was with the all-in-one zip.

frank

On 21 March 2013 01:28, Chris Muller <[hidden email]> wrote: