A common question for Python for Series 60 newcomers is how to build standalone Symbian applications from Python source code. We have been using Makefile based toolchain internally. I describe it in this picture, I didn’t bother to add thumbnail for the image, since it’s a 3400 pixels wide diagram.
The diagram describes building a PyS60 application with some Python extensions (Symbian native C++) mixed in and bundling it all to one downloadable SIS file. The application will appear as any first class S60 application in the menu and the user does not know it’s running Python internally, besides bad installation experience (it challenges Microsoft installers with all those unnecessary yes/no questions), extra uninstaller entries and slow start-up time.
The biggest problems are caused by embedded SISs (SIS inside other SIS files) which are not treaded very wel by several Symbian parties. In theory, it could be build one monolithic SIS, but you’d need to recompile PyS60 from scratch and patch UIDs inside it for your own UIDs received from symbiansigned.com. We are planning to explore SCons based build solution to address this problem, since Makefiles are a bit unflexible with tasks like PKG file and UID range generation.
Also, see UIKludges project for additional details for PKG files of Python extensions.
You need to have
Series 60 SDK (contains some old GNU make)
You need to master
A build tool (make)
Symbian PKG file structure
Lots of different command line tools
It’s the best one we have for now
Symbian signing and certification companies don’t understand embedded SIS files (all SIS files must be signed prior embedding) and may have hard time signing SIS files containing only an extension DLL for Pyton. Symbian Signed test criteria has been built only UI application based SIS files in the mind.
You cannot cook your own patched PyS60 distribution without revamping some hardcoded UIDs and paths, since otherwise there are UID conflicts (EXE and DLL file UIDs are in Nokia’s protected range)
S60 installers askes extra confirmation for every embedded SIS file, even in the middle of the progress bar, so the user experience of installation is screwed up
There will extra uninstallation entry for every embedded SIS file in S60 application manager confusing the user
As you can see, most cons come from Symbian and Symbian signing limitations and have nothing to do with Python
Ps. I would have put this thing to wiki.opensource.nokia.com, but their webmaster email address is non-functional and one cannot upload images to their Wiki.
I want to use Zope 3 interface package to write component architecture i.e. have a plug-ins easily in Python. Zope 3 interfaces are very handy and, which cannot be conducted from the name, are available outside Zopetoo. From my prior experiences I know that Zope 3 interfaces package is one of the best and most underrated Python packages out there. It even influenced to the new design of Python 3k.
Well then… I haven’t used Zope 3 interfaces standalone before, so the first thing what I do is writing “zope 3 interfaces” into my Google search this.
It’s horrible – the very reason I write this quick blog entry. Some notes below (I have written things from the point of external visitor – I have hands deep in Zope myself, so you don’t need to clarify these things for me or teach anything)
The information is tangled mess: please use subtitles and images
You could mention that the package can be used outside Zope
You could mention tat the package is a generic Python package
The list of CamelCaseWordsWhichGoesOnAndOnUnexplained made me puke. Please use proper English and explain the meaning of the links.
It has a comment box: I tried to comment the page but I will get permission error. Please do not show the comment box if the commenting is not actually possbile.
Then I tried to register to Zope.org to comment or fix the basic things on the page. You have a join link in zope.org, but there is no registration form. Manual email conversation seem to be prerequisite for the registration. Is Zope a secret society or something…? The contribution barrier just rise too high.
In this point, I give up. Even if you had the best interface package out there, I don’t care anymore. Looks like getting involved to fixing thing takes too much of my time. You had your 10 minutes of time to impress me and you failed. Not only that, but I got so frustrated that I want to learn smoking, fast.
In the post “No, you are not smart enough for Zope” Martjin Faassen highlights some problems of Zope community. “It’s hard to get good content written” Martjin claims. I disagree. Whoever created the page originally could havethought what people coming to the page want. They don’t want to decrypt the brain core dump of hardcore Zope developer. They want to know what is this thing, how this thing is beneficial for them, how do I get started with it and how do I use it.
You all know how Internet works. You all have visit on web pages. You all are customers for the same thing you also produce. So writing a basic web page is not something you couldn’t do.
Pardon me the tone of this post. Zope is the 23th best thing out there, but the Zope community has stagnated badly in some aspects. Some things were acceptable ten years ago when web was still young and Python developers hardcore, but if you don’t keep with the pace you lose all the mindshare.