Bug #1211

Evaluate basing builds on anaconda + conda rather than stock python + pip

Added by Joel Palmius about 1 year ago. Updated about 1 year ago.

Status:NewStart date:10/30/2017
Priority:NormalDue date:
Assignee:Joel Palmius% Done:

0%

Category:Unsorted
Target version:MakeHuman 1.1.2

Description

Anaconda seems somewhat more competent in some regards, and there are packages available for conda which are not available for pip. Most notably there is a conda package for pyside2.

Maybe using conda would also make it possible to avoid disruptive events such as when riverside pulled pyqt4 without warning.

History

#1 Updated by Jonas Hauquier about 1 year ago

Wouldn't that make the builds a lot fatter?

#2 Updated by Joel Palmius about 1 year ago

I don't know. It's not self-evident that the output from pyinstaller would necessarily be larger just because it was evaluated within the scope of anaconda rather than within stock python + pip. That's one part that would need to be evaluated I guess.

But it'd be a lot more convenient to work with anaconda now that we're twiddling around with multiple different setups (testing qt4 vs qt5 on py2 vs py3 and so forth).

#3 Updated by Jonas Hauquier about 1 year ago

Perhaps yes.
It's worth a try at least.
I'd imagine that if the distributable would be too big, it would still be possible to slim it down by deleting the non-needed libraries before packaging it.

Also available in: Atom