[Interest] Qt 5.4.x QML Quick2 OSX STANDARD framework deployments

[md at rpzdesign.com]

Oliver:

Sorry I confused you.

All testing is "in-house", but all the testers need an easy way to 
receive the latest changes in the core binary executable without 
downloading the ENTIRE self contained bundle each upgrade. (12+ MB over 
DropBox/Google Drive == SLOW)

So it is possible to distribute ONCE the self contained bundle to all 
the in-house testers.

When an upgraded version of a given app is ready for testing, only small 
parts INSIDE the self contained bundle need to be re-distributed.

There is no NEED like I originally thought for a shared QT5 
library/frameworks installation outside of the self-contained bundles!

Using shell scripts on OSX to extract,compress,copy to a file sharing 
site like Dropbox or Google Drive, de-compress and re-insert the updated 
binary on the tester machine is all that is necessary.

Of course, AFTER all the in-house testing, then the self contained 
bundles are ready to wider distribution and the Apple Store.

But the original challenge is to create the infrastructure for app 
deployment for both in in-house testing/review (most important) and then 
wider deployment.

Your original comments provoked me to really look at the process and not 
deviate from the self-contained bundle orientation.

So THANK YOU OLIVER!

Mark


On 5/11/2015 1:16 AM, Till Oliver Knoll wrote:
>
>
>
>> Am 10.05.2015 um 21:30 schrieb "rpzrpzrpz at gmail.com" <rpzrpzrpz at gmail.com>:
>>
>> Oliver:
>>
>> I took your advice to heart.
>>
>> I think there is a happy middle ground using scripts.
>>
>> During in-house development, I can send everyone a given app with a
>> fully self contained bundle.  Ultimately, this will satisfy store
>> requirements.
>>
>> But for in-house development, 2 script files can run macdeployqt,
>> extract and compress the binary inside the testapp.app file, and place
>> the smaller file onto the DropBox distribution directory for over the
>> internet distribution.
>
> In-House vs Dropbox vs Internet distribution? "Smaller file" = your application?
>
>> On the user side, they can run a script to import the compressed binary
>> into the proper testapp.app file on their local machine.
>
> Users = "they" = Testers? In-house testing? Why "internet distribution" and the need for "macdeployqt"?
>
> I must confess you left me confused here ;)
>>
>> This will avoid the repeated download of the massive QT5 libraries and
>> frameworks everytime we ship a new version of the application.
>>
>> And it will not break the protocol of using self contained bundles for
>> applications.
>
> But one thing's for sure: if you mean "it" as in "running scripts in order to fetch some dependencies (Qt framework)" then this very well violates the Mac App Store rules. There is no way you can have a Mac App Store running a script to fetch Qt frameworks from some "shared Dropbox folder" or "from the Internet".
>
> And the same goes for updates: each update must be fully self-contained, means: with all necessary (Qt) frameworks (it is well possible that the Mac App Store uses a "diff update mechanism, not sure).
>
>
> For everything else you can do what you want, but I still fail why you'd want to have scripts for "in-house testing": I mean, "in-house" = fast intranet - right? ;)
>
> But if you really mean Joe iAverage Mac user to take part in some "test campaign": don't expect them to know how to even open the Terminal application, let alone executing scripts ;)
>
> Cheers,
>    Oliver
> _______________________________________________
> Interest mailing list
> Interest at qt-project.org
> http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest
>

-- 
No spell checkers were harmed during the creation of this message.