Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Specify installation for Linux, Mac OSX, and WIndows #431

Open
pydanny opened this issue Dec 4, 2015 · 8 comments
Open

Specify installation for Linux, Mac OSX, and WIndows #431

pydanny opened this issue Dec 4, 2015 · 8 comments

Comments

@pydanny
Copy link
Member

pydanny commented Dec 4, 2015

We don't differentiate well between operation systems. http://cookiecutter-django.readthedocs.org/en/latest/developing-locally.html is for Linux, but doesn't do much to help Mac OSX or Windows users.

@bobstrecansky
Copy link

Alongside this, probably want to define a requirements.rpm and requirements.brew for install_os_dependencies.sh

@crdoconnor
Copy link
Contributor

If you do:

pip install unixpackage

and then:

unixpackage install -r requirements.apt

It should find and try to install the relevant equivalent packages on RPM systems, Arch and Brew.

This doesn't help Windows users though.

@burhan
Copy link
Collaborator

burhan commented Jan 8, 2016

I can see three ways to improve our support for Windows:

  1. Create our own chocolatey package to add those binaries/libraries that need separate installers for Windows. Right now I can only think of psycopg but this will future proof us. Windows 10 has built-in support for external package repositories (and it integrates with chocolatey), and for Windows 7/8 users they can install chocolatey to download the package.
  2. Advocate the use of docker as our compatibility later for Windows. This has its own challenges; in that docker is rapidly updating and especially on Windows a lot of things are still in early beta or can cause unexpected errors. Advantage to this approach is that it takes away a lot of the management that we have to do to support Windows; plus there are promising IDE integration options for docker like the work being done at Jetbrains.
  3. Complete the documentation - adding a FAQ section for Windows to cover most issues; and let the end user decide which way to move forward. I personally think this is the best way forward as we don't end up advocating one or other (less opinionated, more choice).

Thoughts?

@jayfk
Copy link
Collaborator

jayfk commented Feb 8, 2016

  • option 3.

@burhan
Copy link
Collaborator

burhan commented Apr 21, 2016

I have a fourth option:

  1. Encourage contributors to submit pull requests for links to a community supported fork for OS-specific flavors. I can see this being useful for other Linux distributions (and of course, Windows). If we do this we have to come up with some guidelines to ensure compatibility with the core version of the django cookiecutter.

@rookiec14
Copy link

option 3

@pydanny
Copy link
Member Author

pydanny commented Sep 21, 2017

Considering the growing support for Linux on Windows, does it make sense to take Windows off the list?

@burhan
Copy link
Collaborator

burhan commented Sep 22, 2017 via email

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

8 participants