So what would the current thinking be on a Python Portable app. Should placement of the python language folder be in X:\PortableApps\PythonPortable? Or into the CommonFiles folder, ie. X:\PortableApps\CommonFiles\python?
New: Kanri (Oct 9, '24), Platform 29.5.3 (Jun 27, '24)
1,100+ portable packages, 1.1 billion downloads
No Ads November!, Please donate today
Visit the Community page
Join our forums
Subscribe to our email newsletter
Subscribe with RSS
Follow us on Facebook
Follow us on LinkedIn
Follow us on Twitter
Follow us on Mastodon
Follow us on BlueSky
if its an app that needs python, ya i would put python in common. sounds right for the paf platform to support python apps just like java.
there is a windows portable python available at https://github.com/winpython/winpython
i'm using it and it has both a version 2.x and 3.x available.
X:\PortableApps\PythonPortable,more to see XX-Net.need upgrade python to 3.5.10
Thank you very much!
Chinese,study by self.
Interesting post. I am just starting to use Python, want to use 3.x and would love to have it as part of my Portable apps collection. I have a question since I'm not sure what the bottom line is here.
Can I download the Python from the github link, which in turn goes to a SourceForge link. It downloads as an .exe and not .paf. It says it is portable but then says "most" of your settings will transfer if you load it onto a USB. A little vague.
Anyhow, if I extract the program to a folder in X:\PortableApps\CommonFiles\python will it show up in the portable apps menu? Can I get it to show up? If it is not in common but in a separate folder along with the other programs will programs needing python be aware of its location and use it?
Any advice welcomed.
I think you should do a normal PortableApp of PythonPortable2.7.x and PythonPortable3.x. If it turns out to be more useful as a CommonFiles plugin then you could consider doing one.
That's the way to go then. Stand alone versions of 2.7.x and 3.4/5.x versions of Python in both 64bit and 32bit. That way developers can have multiple versions of Python available as needed. Am looking at doing simple (plain) versions and PortableApps versions of WinPython.
Dan "FloriDan" Carroll
Just an old hacker having fun.
Dan;
WinPython is seeing increased use for data science and analytics. A .paf version for portable apps would be much appreciated and. I suspect, much used.
Also, since we have portable R already available as a portable app, embedding that would make it a world class application. I'm aware that there are two camps in Analytics, the R camp and the python camp, sort of like Vi and Emacs. Incorporating both, as many Linux distributions do. There may be a good reason one can't do this, so it may not be practical. Still, WinPython would be a significant contribution.
Hey, I was starting to look into doing this myself, and I'm wondering if you've made any progress toward this and/or are you still planning to make a Python Portable release.
If you're still working on it, I might be able to help, and if you're not, then I'll keep working on mine and see if/when I can get it to a state I'm happy with.
Anyway, please let me know where things stand regarding any new Python Portable release(s).
~3D1T0R
The Python Portable 3.2.1.1 app is available at SF here. It can be installed manually to the local PA directory (just run the .exe, no admin privileges required). Why is not also available through the PortableApps installer? Is it no longer maintained and for this reason you want to "start anew"?
Check the thread started by John Haller about Python on the Portable Apps platform at https://portableapps.com/node/56685.
Dan "FloriDan" Carroll
Just an old hacker having fun.