Windows Chocolatey package for SuperCollider

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
7 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Windows Chocolatey package for SuperCollider

mike
Hello,

I would like to create a Chocolatey package for SuperCollider. I'm
writing here because I've never engaged with the SC dev community before
and figured I should at least say "hello" before working on this!

For those not familiar, Chocolatey is a Windows package manager (like
apt-get or yum, but for Windows). I've done some local testing and the
package should (fingers crossed) be very straightforward to create; it
will simply download the 32-bit or 64-bit installer .exe and silently
install it. A new Chocolatey package could/should be published for each
release of SuperCollider.

I'm eager to take this on, and eager to address any concerns or
questions!

Regards,
Mike

--
  Mike Hodnick
  [hidden email]

_______________________________________________
sc-dev mailing list

info (subscription, etc.): http://www.birmingham.ac.uk/facilities/ea-studios/research/supercollider/mailinglist.aspx
archive: http://www.listarc.bham.ac.uk/marchives/sc-dev/
search: http://www.listarc.bham.ac.uk/lists/sc-dev/search/
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Windows Chocolatey package for SuperCollider

Rainer Schuetz
Hi Mike and all,

Haha, after homebrew now chocolatey, but with some cultural differences ;) I think it would be nice to add SC! Especially if you keep updating the package with each new release. Or is there a way for Chocolatey to detect that a new version is available? Actually it would be nice, if you made sure, that Git for Windows is installed on the machine (I hope that doesn't require it to be in the chocolatey install location). The official download location of SC is on Github, you plan you use that, right? Is it guaranteed that nothing else will be added to the package, like promotion material or so? But I am not even sure it could be prevented.

What do others think, I can't see a downside to this, except if it isn't maintained. But I think the system is such that if it's neglected, somebody else can provide a newer package. It's just the installer, btw, building of the binaries is not possible (please correct me if I'm wrong, Mike).

Chocolatey has a not so subtle/transparent commercial aroma, but the software is on Github, Apache license. The money they make seems to be from deployment for companies with paid for licenses.

Best
.r.


> On 10. May 2017, at 21:04, [hidden email] wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> I would like to create a Chocolatey package for SuperCollider. I'm
> writing here because I've never engaged with the SC dev community before
> and figured I should at least say "hello" before working on this!
>
> For those not familiar, Chocolatey is a Windows package manager (like
> apt-get or yum, but for Windows). I've done some local testing and the
> package should (fingers crossed) be very straightforward to create; it
> will simply download the 32-bit or 64-bit installer .exe and silently
> install it. A new Chocolatey package could/should be published for each
> release of SuperCollider.
>
> I'm eager to take this on, and eager to address any concerns or
> questions!
>
> Regards,
> Mike
>
> --
>  Mike Hodnick
>  [hidden email]
>
> _______________________________________________
> sc-dev mailing list
>
> info (subscription, etc.): http://www.birmingham.ac.uk/facilities/ea-studios/research/supercollider/mailinglist.aspx
> archive: http://www.listarc.bham.ac.uk/marchives/sc-dev/
> search: http://www.listarc.bham.ac.uk/lists/sc-dev/search/


_______________________________________________
sc-dev mailing list

info (subscription, etc.): http://www.birmingham.ac.uk/facilities/ea-studios/research/supercollider/mailinglist.aspx
archive: http://www.listarc.bham.ac.uk/marchives/sc-dev/
search: http://www.listarc.bham.ac.uk/lists/sc-dev/search/
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Windows Chocolatey package for SuperCollider

mike
Thanks for the response and interest! Here are some answers to your
questions:

My intention would be to keep the package updated as new versions of SC
are released. The package code would be in a github repository, so pull
requests would be welcomed (perhaps the repository should exist at
github.com/supercollider?) as new versions of SC are published.

I'm not sure if new versions can be auto-detected. The Atom editor choco
package does this, but I don't know how. It may require some more
sophisticated "phoning home" to do so. I can look in to it.

There is a Git for Windows choco package, and it could be specified as a
dependency in the SC choco package. I don't know where Git would get
installed; I also hope it would not install it in the Chocolatey
location. If it is an EXE or MSI installer, it would get installed to
Program Files, I believe (just as SC would).

Yes, the package would use the EXEs from
http://supercollider.github.io/download. Either they could be linked
from the choco package itself (easiest), or the EXEs could be bundled in
the package (most reliable for users). Source code would not be included
for building; only the installers.

I personally would not add anything else to the package. If you're
asking whether the folks at Chocolatey adds content themselves - I've
never heard of or seen this and I would be shocked if they did so.

-Mike

On Wed, May 10, 2017, at 05:12 PM, [hidden email] wrote:

> Hi Mike and all,
>
> Haha, after homebrew now chocolatey, but with some cultural differences
> ;) I think it would be nice to add SC! Especially if you keep updating
> the package with each new release. Or is there a way for Chocolatey to
> detect that a new version is available? Actually it would be nice, if you
> made sure, that Git for Windows is installed on the machine (I hope that
> doesn't require it to be in the chocolatey install location). The
> official download location of SC is on Github, you plan you use that,
> right? Is it guaranteed that nothing else will be added to the package,
> like promotion material or so? But I am not even sure it could be
> prevented.
>
> What do others think, I can't see a downside to this, except if it isn't
> maintained. But I think the system is such that if it's neglected,
> somebody else can provide a newer package. It's just the installer, btw,
> building of the binaries is not possible (please correct me if I'm wrong,
> Mike).
>
> Chocolatey has a not so subtle/transparent commercial aroma, but the
> software is on Github, Apache license. The money they make seems to be
> from deployment for companies with paid for licenses.
>
> Best
> .r.
>
>
> > On 10. May 2017, at 21:04, [hidden email] wrote:
> >
> > Hello,
> >
> > I would like to create a Chocolatey package for SuperCollider. I'm
> > writing here because I've never engaged with the SC dev community before
> > and figured I should at least say "hello" before working on this!
> >
> > For those not familiar, Chocolatey is a Windows package manager (like
> > apt-get or yum, but for Windows). I've done some local testing and the
> > package should (fingers crossed) be very straightforward to create; it
> > will simply download the 32-bit or 64-bit installer .exe and silently
> > install it. A new Chocolatey package could/should be published for each
> > release of SuperCollider.
> >
> > I'm eager to take this on, and eager to address any concerns or
> > questions!
> >
> > Regards,
> > Mike
> >
> > --
> >  Mike Hodnick
> >  [hidden email]
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > sc-dev mailing list
> >
> > info (subscription, etc.): http://www.birmingham.ac.uk/facilities/ea-studios/research/supercollider/mailinglist.aspx
> > archive: http://www.listarc.bham.ac.uk/marchives/sc-dev/
> > search: http://www.listarc.bham.ac.uk/lists/sc-dev/search/
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> sc-dev mailing list
>
> info (subscription, etc.):
> http://www.birmingham.ac.uk/facilities/ea-studios/research/supercollider/mailinglist.aspx
> archive: http://www.listarc.bham.ac.uk/marchives/sc-dev/
> search: http://www.listarc.bham.ac.uk/lists/sc-dev/search/

_______________________________________________
sc-dev mailing list

info (subscription, etc.): http://www.birmingham.ac.uk/facilities/ea-studios/research/supercollider/mailinglist.aspx
archive: http://www.listarc.bham.ac.uk/marchives/sc-dev/
search: http://www.listarc.bham.ac.uk/lists/sc-dev/search/
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Windows Chocolatey package for SuperCollider

Rainer Schuetz

On 11. May 2017, at 03:44, [hidden email] wrote:

Thanks for the response and interest! Here are some answers to your
questions:

My intention would be to keep the package updated as new versions of SC
are released. The package code would be in a github repository, so pull
requests would be welcomed (perhaps the repository should exist at
github.com/supercollider?) as new versions of SC are published.

Ah, it's here, right?


That's nice, I had a look at the git package file, I think it's cool.

I'm not sure if new versions can be auto-detected. The Atom editor choco
package does this, but I don't know how. It may require some more
sophisticated "phoning home" to do so. I can look in to it.

Yea, no worries, I was just curious.

There is a Git for Windows choco package, and it could be specified as a
dependency in the SC choco package. I don't know where Git would get
installed; I also hope it would not install it in the Chocolatey
location. If it is an EXE or MSI installer, it would get installed to
Program Files, I believe (just as SC would).

I think not, but I'm not sure. But well, that's the same with homebrew and friends, maybe just a matter of getting used to.

Yes, the package would use the EXEs from
http://supercollider.github.io/download. Either they could be linked
from the choco package itself (easiest), or the EXEs could be bundled in
the package (most reliable for users).

That later alternative is part of the commercial, right? I think direct download from the original source is just fine. It'll keep transparent (a bit ;) ) where SuperCollider actually originates from...

I personally would not add anything else to the package. If you're
asking whether the folks at Chocolatey adds content themselves - I've
never heard of or seen this and I would be shocked if they did so.

Yea, it's probably not fair to raise that issue in the context of Chocolatey. SourceForge actually did stuff like that and have since lost their initially good reputation.

To chocolatey into context: Windows seems to be experiencing kind of an unixiyication explosion, both technically and culturally. You can now install kind of a Ubuntu virtual machine on a Windows computer (bash for Windows), and - while I haven't tried it - you could probably actually run linux-SC downloaded as ubuntu package, if you install a X-server in "Windows proper". Initially they said bash for Windows would be command line only, but by now you can install the full ubuntu package-set in that system. You could easily use a Windows machine to build linux sc. Bash for Windows is still preview, but pretty advanced already (Ubuntu 16.04). Then multiple package managers emerge and make it into the mainstream: chocolatey for full fledged applications, vcpkg as a library manager (hopefully very useful soon for our build system), still ini its infancy but growing rapidly, conan as a meta cross platform system. Cmake is getting *really* popular everywhere (vcpkg uses it as it's language like homebrew uses ruby), VS2017 includes cmake now. MS is visibly making an effort to join this open-source ecosystem, which I think developed around git and Github. It seems to me some good choices were made regarding SC in the past...

Best
.r.





Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Windows Chocolatey package for SuperCollider

mike
I think the best step to move forward with this is to put the SC choco
package code somewhere appropriate. May I suggest creating a new, empty
repository under https://github.com/supercollider/? That way, the SC dev
team can ensure package quality through pull requests, or the SC dev
team could update the package code directly. I think this location would
also give the SC choco package a clear sense of ownership by the SC
community (rather than a one-off programmer like me).

I'd like to create a follow-up package for the sc3-plugins; more reason
to create repositories under github.com/supercollider?

Otherwise, if this is too burdensome, I can certainly do the work in my
own github repository, then publish the package to chocolatey when it is
ready.

-Mike


On Thu, May 11, 2017, at 04:17 AM, [hidden email] wrote:

>
> > On 11. May 2017, at 03:44, [hidden email] wrote:
> >
> > Thanks for the response and interest! Here are some answers to your
> > questions:
> >
> > My intention would be to keep the package updated as new versions of SC
> > are released. The package code would be in a github repository, so pull
> > requests would be welcomed (perhaps the repository should exist at
> > github.com/supercollider?) as new versions of SC are published.
>
> Ah, it's here, right?
>
> https://github.com/chocolatey/chocolatey-coreteampackages
> <https://github.com/chocolatey/chocolatey-coreteampackages>
>
> That's nice, I had a look at the git package file, I think it's cool.
>
> > I'm not sure if new versions can be auto-detected. The Atom editor choco
> > package does this, but I don't know how. It may require some more
> > sophisticated "phoning home" to do so. I can look in to it.
>
> Yea, no worries, I was just curious.
>
> > There is a Git for Windows choco package, and it could be specified as a
> > dependency in the SC choco package. I don't know where Git would get
> > installed; I also hope it would not install it in the Chocolatey
> > location. If it is an EXE or MSI installer, it would get installed to
> > Program Files, I believe (just as SC would).
>
> I think not, but I'm not sure. But well, that's the same with homebrew
> and friends, maybe just a matter of getting used to.
>
> > Yes, the package would use the EXEs from
> > http://supercollider.github.io/download. Either they could be linked
> > from the choco package itself (easiest), or the EXEs could be bundled in
> > the package (most reliable for users).
>
> That later alternative is part of the commercial, right? I think direct
> download from the original source is just fine. It'll keep transparent (a
> bit ;) ) where SuperCollider actually originates from...
>
> > I personally would not add anything else to the package. If you're
> > asking whether the folks at Chocolatey adds content themselves - I've
> > never heard of or seen this and I would be shocked if they did so.
>
> Yea, it's probably not fair to raise that issue in the context of
> Chocolatey. SourceForge actually did stuff like that and have since lost
> their initially good reputation.
>
> To chocolatey into context: Windows seems to be experiencing kind of an
> unixiyication explosion, both technically and culturally. You can now
> install kind of a Ubuntu virtual machine on a Windows computer (bash for
> Windows), and - while I haven't tried it - you could probably actually
> run linux-SC downloaded as ubuntu package, if you install a X-server in
> "Windows proper". Initially they said bash for Windows would be command
> line only, but by now you can install the full ubuntu package-set in that
> system. You could easily use a Windows machine to build linux sc. Bash
> for Windows is still preview, but pretty advanced already (Ubuntu 16.04).
> Then multiple package managers emerge and make it into the mainstream:
> chocolatey for full fledged applications, vcpkg as a library manager
> (hopefully very useful soon for our build system), still ini its infancy
> but growing rapidly, conan as a meta cross platform system. Cmake is
> getting *really* popular everywhere (vcpkg uses it as it's language like
> homebrew uses ruby), VS2017 includes cmake now. MS is visibly making an
> effort to join this open-source ecosystem, which I think developed around
> git and Github. It seems to me some good choices were made regarding SC
> in the past...
>
> Best
> .r.
>
>
>
>
>

_______________________________________________
sc-dev mailing list

info (subscription, etc.): http://www.birmingham.ac.uk/facilities/ea-studios/research/supercollider/mailinglist.aspx
archive: http://www.listarc.bham.ac.uk/marchives/sc-dev/
search: http://www.listarc.bham.ac.uk/lists/sc-dev/search/
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Windows Chocolatey package for SuperCollider

Rainer Schuetz
You chose the location, from my perspective both, you going independently, or you doing it in a SC repo is fine, I have a slight preference for doing it inside SC. If you want it in SuperCollider, we can give you write access specifically to that repo. I think one repo, both for SC and sc3-plugins is fine, isn't it? Would it be a fork of the chocolatey packages repo? In that case the name were a given, right? Let me know how that should be done if you're happy to do it inside SC org.

To the others: please speak up if you have reservations. And just to be clear: it is possible to give users a "collaborator" status that restricts write access to one specific repo.

Best
.r.



On 11. May 2017, at 15:39, [hidden email] wrote:

I think the best step to move forward with this is to put the SC choco
package code somewhere appropriate. May I suggest creating a new, empty
repository under https://github.com/supercollider/? That way, the SC dev
team can ensure package quality through pull requests, or the SC dev
team could update the package code directly. I think this location would
also give the SC choco package a clear sense of ownership by the SC
community (rather than a one-off programmer like me). 

I'd like to create a follow-up package for the sc3-plugins; more reason
to create repositories under github.com/supercollider?

Otherwise, if this is too burdensome, I can certainly do the work in my
own github repository, then publish the package to chocolatey when it is
ready. 

-Mike

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Windows Chocolatey package for SuperCollider

mike
One repo for both the SuperCollider and sc3-plugins packages would be
fine. I would favor putting it under the SuperCollider github org, and I
would be delighted to be added to the team.

No, it wouldn't be a fork of the chocolatey packages repo. It would be
an independent package, unrelated to the chocolatey org. I'm confused
about what the "Chocolatey Community Core Team Packages" really are.
From what I understand, the official way to publish a choco package is
through the "choco push" command, with an API key. For example, here is
the GHC package source: https://github.com/Mistuke/GhcChoco. It is not
anywhere in that "Community Core Team Package" repo.

-Mike

On Thu, May 11, 2017, at 10:56 AM, [hidden email] wrote:

> You chose the location, from my perspective both, you going
> independently, or you doing it in a SC repo is fine, I have a slight
> preference for doing it inside SC. If you want it in SuperCollider, we
> can give you write access specifically to that repo. I think one repo,
> both for SC and sc3-plugins is fine, isn't it? Would it be a fork of the
> chocolatey packages repo? In that case the name were a given, right? Let
> me know how that should be done if you're happy to do it inside SC org.
>
> To the others: please speak up if you have reservations. And just to be
> clear: it is possible to give users a "collaborator" status that
> restricts write access to one specific repo.
>
> Best
> .r.
>
>
>
> > On 11. May 2017, at 15:39, [hidden email] wrote:
> >
> > I think the best step to move forward with this is to put the SC choco
> > package code somewhere appropriate. May I suggest creating a new, empty
> > repository under https://github.com/supercollider/? <https://github.com/supercollider/?> That way, the SC dev
> > team can ensure package quality through pull requests, or the SC dev
> > team could update the package code directly. I think this location would
> > also give the SC choco package a clear sense of ownership by the SC
> > community (rather than a one-off programmer like me).
> >
> > I'd like to create a follow-up package for the sc3-plugins; more reason
> > to create repositories under github.com/supercollider? <http://github.com/supercollider?>
> >
> > Otherwise, if this is too burdensome, I can certainly do the work in my
> > own github repository, then publish the package to chocolatey when it is
> > ready.
> >
> > -Mike
>

_______________________________________________
sc-dev mailing list

info (subscription, etc.): http://www.birmingham.ac.uk/facilities/ea-studios/research/supercollider/mailinglist.aspx
archive: http://www.listarc.bham.ac.uk/marchives/sc-dev/
search: http://www.listarc.bham.ac.uk/lists/sc-dev/search/