Open j9ac9k opened 6 years ago
Why not stick with an installer that grabs PyQt5 from the web?
I'm fine with that, and it would certainly simplify the licensing requirements, but I'm not sure if any of the native installation solutions at our disposal support a "net-install" type of mechanism.
Most python app -> native installer schemes I've seen package everything up, including the dependencies; not to say that there isn't a tool out there that we could use.
Doing a net-install definitely helps with having to host a 2GB binary!
I think we should at least try for this. Perhaps the installer payload is one that does the actual "net-install"?
hmm... I'm reading through the pynsist docs here https://pynsist.readthedocs.io/en/latest/
I'm not sure if I'm reading the docs right, but I think you can setup the installer to download a wheel from pypi on install.
That only would qualify a windows binary though.
Ideally in the future Timeview will come with a standalone installer.
However, if we distribute TimeView, with PyQt5, we will need to release that version of TimeView under GPL-3 license.
If we distribute a native installer that grabs PyQt5 from the web, we can distribute that under the MIT license.
There is a thread on riverbankcomputing that details some use case scenarios here:
https://riverbankcomputing.com/pipermail/pyqt/2016-September/038135.html
Question is, does it make sense to distribute TimeView, as a standalone installer, under the GPL-3 license and otherwise distribute under the MIT license?