From: lecoat@atari.org
Hi,
Chris Ridd writes:
> Francois LE COAT wrote:
>>>>>> Do you know the status of ARAnyM developments? There's only one
>>>>>> developer for the macOS target, and the support of Apple Silicon is
>>>>>> hardly working, though the JIT compiler is not supported yet. Before
>>>>>> thinking about an iOS support, there's a lot to be done with macOS!
>>>>>
>>>>> Of course I do, and it does look a bit of a mess. If your "one
>>>>> developer for the macOS target" is Philipp Donze, then he doesn't
>>>>> upstream his changes :-(
>>>>
>>>> Well the mess is not from developers, but from GitHub that is a
>>>> Microsoft technology. I don't understand anything to GitHub, that
>>>> is rather intended to Windows developers exclusively, I suspect.
>>>
>>> I'm not sure. I don't perceive a Windows bias in Github, after all it
>>> was used for open source projects for a very long time before
>>> Microsoft bought GitHub.
>>>
>>>>> Having said that, I did build the MacAranym-Latest.xcodeproj a
>>>>> while ago, create a small improvement to the screenshot code, and I
>>>>> do run it on an M1. The "main" MacAranym.xcodeproj is no longer
>>>>> buildable on any modern Mac/Xcode.
>>>>
>>>> That's what we're talking. For instance for the Hatari projects,
>>>> there's
>>>> releases, and developments. But for ARAnyM it's not the case, at all.
>>>> If there was a favorite developments platform, like the ATARI VCS, that
>>>> would make things easier. x86 ARAnyM target is the most accomplished,
>>>> for Windows, macOS and GNU/Linux. For ARM all is rather experimental.
>>>> Among GitHub, all CPU targets, the situation for devels is
>>>> inextricable.
>>>> Specially for old software like ARAnyM, that is in delicate situation.
>>>> It seems to me that peoples are discouraged with the GitHub complexity.
>>>
>>> Perhaps, but honestly it just looks like git to me with their own
>>> style of pull requests. Nothing outrageously different here. Do you
>>> have any concrete examples of "the situation for devels is
>>> inextricable" especially regarding GitHub?
>>
>> Yes. Will I have to pay developers to obtain macOS or Windows binaries?
>
> I can't speak for Windows. But for Macs there are a few scenarios for
> developers:
>
> * do nothing: the app cannot be notarised by Apple and users will get
> warned the app is untrusted. There's an extra step in System Settings
> that the user has to take to allow it. This is not difficult, but it
> needs documenting. It only affects the first run.
>
> * pay for an individual Apple Developer Program membership ($99 per
> annum): this lets the developer submit it to Apple for notarisation, and
> users will no longer get a warning.
>
> * figure out how to get a waiver for that program membership for the
> Aranym *team* ($0 but there is some overhead as you have to be an
> official (and US?) non-profit organisation): this lets the team submit
> it to Apple for notarisation, and users will no longer get a warning.
>
> Developers can notarise as many times per year as they want, so you'd
> want to do this in an automated way for every build. I think Philipp's
> done this, possibly with an individual membership.
>
> Apple's notarisation system is meant to scan your code for "malicious
> content". Obviously you can choose to believe they really just want to
> screw developers out of $99 every year.
>
> I assume (but have no evidence) that the waiver option is aimed at open
> source projects. It would be interesting to find out what other open
> source projects actually do.
In the current situation I have a lot of difficulties with the binaries.
Can you test *ARAnyM miniPack*
I hope that it runs correctly, but I'm not sure at all. Because the
binary was downloaded on GitHub, and there's issues with signature...
Thanks,
Regards,
--
François LE COAT
Author of Eureka 2.12 (2D Graph Describer, 3D Modeller)
https://eureka.atari.org/
--- SoupGate-DOS v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
