Program: Portable Python
Website: http://portablepython.com/
Description: The python programming language made portable
License: Not shown on website but it is possible to fork the entire project from github
I already use this app via installing to the the x:\PortableApps\ directly through the installer found on the website and it works fine. I was just wondering about getting that whole project moved to the .paf.exe format so that it can more fully integrate with the portable apps platform. Not certain how I might be able to do this with the launcher, but if I figure it out I with let the community know.
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
According to their github page, the app is licensed under MIT.
Thanks, I was at work and unable to do much browsing between password resets for our users.
If an application is inherently portable and self contained why would it benefit from being packaged in PA format?
In my experience the re-packaging of a known to be portable app into a PA format app generally makes things worse not better.
Wm
My thought was just to get it to work with the platform a bit more easily.
This is a question that cones up often, including from publishers themselves. This is the same answer we give them:
https://portableapps.com/about/what_is_a_portable_app#whypaf
Not mentioned is that released apps have an audience of thousand of potential new users of that application.
It's millions every month. And since it's a good point, I've added it to the whypaf section.
Sometimes, the impossible can become possible, if you're awesome!
I low-balled, figuring I'd be safe going with thousands... Didn't want to say millions and be wrong.
[Edit] stupid autocorrect!
if python of itself were to be added it would need to go in Common Files, surely? Very few applications are that generalist in use although they may potentially be very generalist. At the moment I think (I am prepared to be persuaded) that the *use* of python is sufficiently application specific that a Common Files python wouldn't actually be very useful.
If we were to go for a Common Files python then GIMP (I am guessing it is the most used app that uses python) would probably be the place to start but won't contain the necessary bits and pieces for a new application which will need its own bit of change to a standard python, i.e. python isn't, IMO, standard enough yet.
Certainly agree about the audience and approval part of an app being part of the project. If I am looking for a utility or program to do X I start here!
Wm