search

cefsharp / cef-binary

NuGet repackaging of the CEF binaries provided by Chromium Embedded Framework
https://cef-builds.spotifycdn.com/index.html
Other
108 stars 87 forks source link

MacOS packages missing #107

Closed ITDancer13 closed 7 months ago

ITDancer13 commented 1 year ago

At the moment there are no NuGet packages published for MacOS x64-bit and MacOS ARM64. Would be great to get them published as well. Any plans doing that?

amaitland commented 1 year ago

What's the use case?

Cefsharp only runs on windows as it's written in VC++

ITDancer13 commented 1 year ago

That's true for CefSharp. CefGlue on the other hand also provides (basic) implementation for Avalonia which is also running on MacOS. Unfortunately CefGlue has to depend on another package (https://www.nuget.org/packages/cef.redist.osx64) which is not updated frequently. As I want to join as contributor there, I would like to use the same source of redist for all platforms and that would be yours :-)

amaitland commented 1 year ago

There are a number of considerations:

Myget feed space limits We are already at the space limit for the free tier

Maintenance burden For me personally the maintenance burden would need to be near zero. Someone would need to contribute all the scripts and package files.

Build availability What happens when CEF builds aren't available for one/both of the Mac architectures. Looks like currently the 64bit beta build isn't available. This happens for different architectures semi regularly.

If there aren't relevant Mac builds available then I'd need an easy option to skip the Mac packages.

another package (https://www.nuget.org/packages/cef.redist.osx64)

The cef.redist package that are included as part of this project will likely be dropped at some point (https://github.com/cefsharp/cef-binary/issues/93). To free up space on the myget feed this would likely need to be resolved.

amaitland commented 7 months ago

Closing as this is not something I currently have planned.

If someone wants to take ownership of creating/publishing additional packages please continue the discussion at #95