Sigil 0.8.0 Released

[BetterRed]

@KevinH - I guess its the price we have to pay for running interpreted scripting languages, of which there seems to a new one every week. It doesn't seem so long ago that 'serious' s/w developers would sneer at such things. The Tower of Babel is alive and well on your hard disk

When there's a PI that makes in easy to create chapter && end notes, references lists and indexes etc, then I'll be interested in downloading it and to install its requisite interpreter - Lisp p'rhaps

BR

[BetterRed]

Originally Posted by KevinH

I am now confused. If you have 40+ years of Software development / IT experience, then why did you even ask about python since you had to know it was an interpreted scripting language? And why on earth would you care about an official Microsoft C++ runtime dll being included? The days of DLL hell are long gone and uniquely named shared libraries won't hurt your system. If fact Microsoft gives explicit permission to package the dll with your installer/package otherwise the executable simply won't work.

KevinH

I try to imagine how the vast majority of folks might see the world - and I sometimes like to play being a Devil's Advocate.

I believe I said I would prefer an option to install the VS 2013 package. I can imagine that option might be provided in a Custom/Advanced dialogue - such hereabouts



BR

[KevinH]

Python got started in 1991 so over 20 years ago. So hardly the new kid on the block. Also, scripting languages have become one of the favoured tools of both the design-build and rapid prototyping crowd. You of all people should know that every language has it own particular strengths. Python is typically in the top 10 and even top 5 of popular active languages. I took my first programming course in 1978 so you have a few years on me but only a handful. Python is by far the most productive language I have ever done serious work in. You should play around with it for a while.

KevinH

Originally Posted by BetterRed

@KevinH - I guess its the price we have to pay for running interpreted scripting languages, of which there seems to a new one every week. It doesn't seem so long ago that 'serious' s/w developers would sneer at such things. The Tower of Babel is alive and well on your hard disk

When there's a PI that makes in easy to create chapter && end notes, references lists and indexes etc, then I'll be interested in downloading it and to install its requisite interpreter - Lisp p'rhaps

BR

[KevinH]

As long as your custom installer is not compiled with visual studio 2013 C++!

Originally Posted by BetterRed

I try to imagine how the vast majority of folks might see the world - and I sometimes like to play being a Devil's Advocate.

I believe I said I would prefer an option to install the VS 2013 package. I can imagine that option might be provided in a Custom/Advanced dialogue - such hereabouts

Attachment 129044

BR

[BetterRed]

Originally Posted by KevinH

You should play around with it for a while.

Too many dead brain cells, I blame the latter years when I was orchestrating global 24*7 help desks and data centres

As I said I was playing DA. With so many people wanting to self publish and bypass the editing profession entirely, instead relying on their mothers or partners as a proofreaders (Oh that's wonderful dear, I'm sure it will win a Booker or at least a Pultizer...) someone has to do it

BR

[user_none]

Originally Posted by BetterRed

Dumb question - am I right in thinking that Sigil require the user to install the Python developer tools

No. You don't need the development tools just the run time.

Originally Posted by BetterRed

I have a swag of applications that have plug-ins - calibre, notepad++, irfanview, The Gimp, Fast Picture Viewer etc. AFAIK none of them require me to download developer tools to use any of the plug-ins.

All of these bundle the entire runtime as part of their package. So you have multiple copies of the same python version installed just private to each of those.

Calibre for example is written almost entirely in Python and needs Python just to run. It includes an entire Python runtime for this very purpose.

Sigil may go this route in the future. One major disadvantage is doing so would double the size of Sigil. Also, OS X and most Linux distributions have Python installed by default. On those OSs (Sigil is primarily developed on OS X) this is a waste because it's already present.

Originally Posted by BetterRed

I believe I said I would prefer an option to install the VS 2013 package. I can imagine that option might be provided in a Custom/Advanced dialogue - such hereabouts

Sigil won't run without it. Period. What you're proposing is to have Sigil allow users to install in a broken state that it leave it unusable? I don't know anyone who would want an option that says, Install but don't allow me to run the installed application...

Sigil itself is built using Microsofts Visual C++ compiler. If you don't have this installed Sigil won't run. This how Microsoft designed their tool chain. There is no way around this and this is what Microsoft tells developers to do who user their development tools.

The alternative is to bundle the DLLs themselves instead of having it as an installable package. Oh and the VS 2013 package is only installed if it is detected not to be present on the system. I suggest you read the description of the package. Especially the part that says (emphasis added):

The Visual C++ Redistributable Packages install run-time components that are required to run C++ applications that are built by using Visual Studio 2013.

Originally Posted by BetterRed

I try to imagine how the vast majority of folks might see the world - and I sometimes like to play being a Devil's Advocate.

The vast majority of people want the program they install to run... They don't want advanced options that make absolutely no sense to disable.

Originally Posted by BetterRed

FWIW I have 40+ years in IT. ~30 in s/w development writing in Assembler, C, C++ and Ada. The last few years were in system & operations management.

Good for you. Now why are we answering these basic questions and explaining basic Windows design to someone with so much experience on the subject?

[BetterRed]

See first attachment - those on the right were downloaded and installed by me as a result of something such as you see at the bottom of this page ==>> Link Shell Extension. None of them were automatically installed by other programs.

Two of the applications I previously mentioned use python, calibre and GIMP and yes they install the python they need in their install directory. Not sure about Photoshop it's not installed on this machine but I think most plugins ship as DLL's and are written in C++ with a few in Delphi and C. FPV, Irfanview, and NP++ plugins ship as DLL's, so I would guess they're written in C++ or C.

I get twitchy when application packages install '3rd Party' software, especially if its into the Windows directory without a) asking for my permission, b) asking me to agree to the license conditions. And particularly when it's a discrete un-installable item that I wouldn't even have noticed being installed had I taken my eye off the install.

BR

[poxalew]

Originally Posted by BetterRed

I get twitchy when application packages install '3rd Party' software, especially if its into the Windows directory without a) asking for my permission, b) asking me to agree to the license conditions. And particularly when it's a discrete un-installable item that I wouldn't even have noticed being installed had I taken my eye off the install.

BR

I don't know what answer you're expecting here, and I don't understand why you're complaining about it here.

The separately uninstallable, side-by-side assembly package is how Microsoft wants applications to handle deployment of their C++ library runtime in VS2013 compiler artefacts. This is their own recommended packaging mechanism. See http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms235299.aspx for details (please make sure to also read the sub-articles.)

That package is signed by Microsoft thus its integrity is as guaranteed as you can get (if you're worried about this, you shouldn't be running untrusted binaries, you should audit the code and then compile it yourself), and installs as a SxS assembly activable through the executable's embedded manifest thus in no way affects any other application on the system (unless their manifest specifically requests this particular version of the VS2013 runtime--in which case you probably already have it installed!).

If any of that runs contrary to how you expect the system to work, I suggest you open a ticket with Microsoft's Servers and Tools division, who is in charge of this. Complaining to Sigil's developers is like complaining to some random driver off the street who drives the same car model that you are that you don't like how the transmission works in that model.

[mrmikel]

No sane developer is going to offer a version where a newbie tinkerer is going to leave out the program that makes it work only so he can complain about it.

I do share the concern that at least two versions of python might be needed in order to use desirable plug ins. Until there is one I can't absolutely do without I will probably install no version of python and skip plug ins on Sigil, since I am on Windows and my Linux install is dedicated to financial business only.

I know it may not be practical, but how about being able to use whatever calibre has installed?

[BetterRed]

It might also be said that no sane developer would tempt a 'newbie' into removing an essential component that was installed 'in the dark'. Not by file deletion, but via Control Panel-Programs & Features->Uninstall. If a 'newbie' deleted the one highlighted in red what would get blamed, why MS Update of course.

You'll see in the attachment I've green boxed MS VS 2010 Tools for Office. I downloaded and installed that in order to run Toxaris' EPUB Tools Add on for Word a few weeks ago. In my software catalogue (Evernote) I have a links from one to the other.

I don't take everything MS say as Gospel, eg I have never utilised the My Documents, My Pictures regime. On the other hand I do abide by their where software should be installed regime.

I also abide by the maxim, if you see any optional software installed and you don't know what it is or you can't trace its provenance then you probably don't need it.

BR

[DiapDealer]

Originally Posted by mrmikel

I do share the concern that at least two versions of python might be needed in order to use desirable plug ins. Until there is one I can't absolutely do without I will probably install no version of python and skip plug ins on Sigil, since I am on Windows and my Linux install is dedicated to financial business only.

I don't see any practical plugins requiring Python 3 available yet. Why would you worry about installing two versions of Python before there was a need (or requirement) to do so? Worrying about needing the second is still not a very good reason not to install Python 2.x. It's not like it's huge, invasive and/or difficult to get rid of. But yeah ... if you're not interested in any of the plugins, it makes perfect sense not to install a program necessary to use them. But then why bring it up in the first place?

I know it may not be practical, but how about being able to use whatever calibre has installed?

So instead of making one third-party package a prerequisite for running Sigil plugins, you're suggesting making another third-party package a prerequisite for running Sigil plugins?

[user_none]

Originally Posted by mrmikel

I know it may not be practical, but how about being able to use whatever calibre has installed?

That's certainly possible. calibre bundles Python 2. You can set the path in Sigil to use the calibre provided Python 2.

Originally Posted by mrmikel

I do share the concern that at least two versions of python might be needed in order to use desirable plug ins.

Not restricting the plugin language is part of the design. We had originally planned on also allowing Lua to be used but due to time constraints removed it. The idea is what ever language you want to write a plugin in you should be able to. We designed the plugin system to make it easy to add support for other languages/interpreters.

The whole Python 2 vs Python 3 debate is the reality of Python today. Python 3 is the Python foundations move forward language. 2 is in maintenance mode and will eventually be dropped by them. We didn't want to hold people back by restricting to Python 2 only but at the same time we realize there is a lot of code out there (DiapDealer already has calibre plugins in Python 2 he's ported to Sigil with minimal effort) already written in Python 2 that can be taken advantage of.

[poxalew]

Originally Posted by BetterRed

It might also be said that no sane developer would tempt a 'newbie' into removing an essential component that was installed 'in the dark'. Not by file deletion, but via Control Panel-Programs & Features->Uninstall. If a 'newbie' deleted the one highlighted in red what would get blamed, why MS Update of course.

You'll see in the attachment I've green boxed MS VS 2010 Tools for Office. I downloaded and installed that in order to run Toxaris' EPUB Tools Add on for Word a few weeks ago. In my software catalogue (Evernote) I have a links from one to the other.

I don't take everything MS say as Gospel, eg I have never utilised the My Documents, My Pictures regime. On the other hand I do abide by their where software should be installed regime.

I also abide by the maxim, if you see any optional software installed and you don't know what it is or you can't trace its provenance then you probably don't need it.

BR

Again, that's Microsoft's decision, you will have to take it up with them if you don't like it. I'm sure they'll be very accomodating. Famed for it.

If this hypothetical user uninstalls some software without knowing what it is and what its function might be, then that hypothetical user should not be surprised if stuff breaks. And said hypothetical users could then simply search for the error message thrown by the runtime linker about the missing DLL and draw the appropriate conclusion.

Anyhow, I'm getting the impression that you're complaining just because you enjoy finding things to complain about--if,a s you say, your system administration experience is so extensive, then you should already have internalized all this. This is definitely not a constructive area of discussion. Sorry I butted in, staying out of this now.

[mrmikel]

Originally Posted by user_none

That's certainly possible. calibre bundles Python 2. You can set the path in Sigil to use the calibre provided Python 2.

Would the path be calibre2/dlls in Windows?

[BetterRed]

Originally Posted by poxalew

This is their own recommended packaging mechanism. See http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms235299.aspx

In your own words it's a recommendation not a mandate, the MS pages are full of such things as "Windows Installer technology can be used..."

My reaction stemmed from the fact that was installed without notice and potentially silently if had I walked away from the install (as I often do) - not from what it was.

When I uninstall Sigil 0.8.0 it doesn't uninstall the C++ libraries it installed. I'm not sure it can/should because unlike things installed in Common Files I suspect there's no usage counts on things such as the C++ libraries. IMO that's another reason why the user should be 'involved' in the process.

That too is my last word on the issue.

BR