Call for volunteers - improved installation experience on OS X, Windows, Linux/Unix

Jeremy Wilkins jeb at jdwilkins.co.uk
Thu Dec 6 17:33:15 GMT 2007


If you're going down the MacPorts route then theres a subversion patch
needed for bzr-svn to work, its probably worth trying to get this
included in the relevent MacPort for subversion-pythonbindings. This
would then allow for a MacPort of bzr-svn.

jebw

On Dec 6, 2007 4:20 PM, Erik Bågfors <zindar at gmail.com> wrote:
> Fun to see this discussion. I actually started the other day to create
> a package installer for Mac.
>
> I really would love if we would have an installer that included bzr,
> bzr-svn, bzr-tools and some other nice plugins.  This is what I
> started to do, but I have no objection for someone else to do it. I
> can't promise that I'll get around to it for 1.0.  But I would LOOOVE
> to see a one click installer that installs all of it.
>
> /Erik
>
> On Dec 6, 2007 2:37 PM, Ian Clatworthy <ian.clatworthy at internode.on.net> wrote:
>
> > With 1.0 just around the corner, we want to ensure that anyone who wants
> > to try out Bazaar can do so with the absolute minimum of pain. We have
> > lots of amazing technology in the Bazaar world but that means little if
> > users can't easily get to it. The core product is one thing but being
> > able to install commonly used plugins is *equally* important.
> >
> > This email is a bit long, sorry. Headings have been added in case you
> > wish to skip bits of limited interest to you.
> >
> > What pieces need to be bundled?
> > -------------------------------
> >
> > Here are the pieces I think we ought to be thinking about in terms of a
> > "batteries included" VCS package:
> >
> > * core product
> > * core productivity plugins
> > * easy migration from Subversion
> > * web server to browse branches
> > * GUI tool
> > * OS-specific shell integration.
> >
> > How should we bundle those?
> > ---------------------------
> >
> > I'm not suggesting we want a single installer for all of that on each OS
> > (for 1.0 at least). However, I would like to see us explicit make an
> > effort to select and package the above pieces into installers for
> > Windows and OS X. The important ingredient to me is dependency
> > management rather than installer count. For example, it's ok to have
> > several installers but the one including bzr-gtk needs to bundle the
> > right py-gtk library for example, the one bundling bzr-svn needs to
> > bundle the right pieces for it, etc.
> >
> > Call for volunteers
> > -------------------
> >
> > Thanks to the work of Olexandr and Adam, we have maintained Windows
> > installers and a MacPort already. Earlier today, I put my thoughts on
> > how we could do better on OS X here:
> > https://bugs.launchpad.net/bzr/+bug/174275. In a nutshell, I'd love to
> > see MacPorts of numerous plugins and a user-friendly installer.
> > Szilvester has offered to do an installer. Hooray! Can anyone else help
> > either in the packaging or the testing thereof?
> >
> > Likewise, we're off to a good start already in the Windows world thanks
> > to the amazing Olexandr. He's also on the right track IMO. For example,
> > he was asking a few days ago about how important a bzr-svn Windows
> > installer was. I think the answer is "very", particularly if that's our
> > preferred way of getting svn repositories converted to Bazaar. See below
> > re that.
> >
> > The Linux/Unix world needs attention as well w.r.t. packaging. Once
> > again, deb/rpm/Freshport packages for the core is one thing: plugins
> > with messy dependencies need packaging love as well and a "meta" package
> > covering "batteries included" has value. Re-branding baz packages to
> > remove confusion is necessary for the MacPort. Perhaps it is elsewhere
> > as well?
> >
> > The new user plug-in selection debate
> > -------------------------------------
> >
> > Beyond my above call for more/better installers/packaging, I'd like to
> > have a debate about which plug-ins we ought to be packaging/recommending
> > (out of the many, many plugins) to brand new, shiny users.
> >
> > Help!!!! Which migration tool from Subversion should new users start
> > with? We currently give them two branches of svn2bzr to choose from as
> > well as bzr-svn. That's *too many options* to begin with! Right now,
> > which is the best, most reliable option? Users want to switch from
> > Subversion to Bazaar. Let's make it as easy to do that as we can so
> > users can try out Bazaar on their branches. (Having tried it and fallen
> > in love, we might recommend one of the other choices which has different
> > risks/rewards. That's ok IMHO.)
> >
> > *Which* GUI tool is recommended for new users on different platforms?
> > They can always install another one later but which one should they
> > start with to get the best initial experience? I'm yet to evaluate them
> > in depth on any OS so I can't say. I'm guessing QBzr is looking a good
> > starting point on Windows, bzr-gtk on Linux, and not-a-clue on OS X?
> >
> > Which web app would we bundle if we had to pick one? webserve?
> > loggerhead? Which is easiest to install and maintain for a user on their
> > desktop? To put some context around this question, Git comes bundled
> > with GitWeb. I've also heard of some users selecting Mercurial primarily
> > because hgweb was much loved over alternatives for other tools. It's
> > cool we offer as much choice as we do. But let's get our users moving
> > and productive by picking one for them initially.
> >
> > What core plugins should we be bundling? bzrtools, difftools and
> > extmerge stand out to me. Is rebase wanted enough to be bundled as well?
> > Others? I'm sure there are. As a rule, if a plugin is useful enough to
> > be talked about in some depth in the User Guide, then it ought to be
> > considered for bundling. (BTW, the User Guide ought to cover the bundled
> > plugins much more than it does. It's not complete yet, though close to
> > acceptable now for 1.0 IMHO.)
> >
> > Summary
> > -------
> >
> > If anyone is looking for a way to contribute, improving packaging and
> > testing it for 1.0 has a high value-to-effort ratio. Another way to help
> > is to simply voice your opinions given what you've learnt using Bazaar
> > on your platform? What plugins should we recommend to new users to make
> > them productive quickly?
> >
> > 1.0 is fast approaching. One of the positives out of taking that leap of
> > faith is that it tends to focus attention on reducing the barriers to
> > entry: installation, documentation, etc. I hope the above email triggers
> > some useful discussion on these fronts. And action!
> >
> > Ian C.
> >
> >
>
>



More information about the bazaar mailing list