[cmake-developers] On Mac OS X, the CMake .app filename should not contain the version number ( http://public.kitware.com/Bug/view.php?id=11693#c24958 )

[David Cole]

Moving to the CMake developer's list, as requested by this bug comment:
http://public.kitware.com/Bug/view.php?id=11693#c24958

Comments or thoughts on the topic are welcome...

Please reply here with any further discussion before adding more info
to the bug report. Once a consensus is reached here, we'll update the
bug again.

Thanks,
David


==========================================================
Transcript of notes added to bug so far for mailing list reference:

Description:

The binary CMake distributions for Mac OS X name the executable "CMake
2.8.3.app", it should be just "CMake.app".

One has only to look into the /Applications folder to see that this is
the Mac convention.

Practically, this is a pain because every time I upgrade, I have to
change all my scripts to refer to the new filename.


Comments / Notes:

(0024958)
Bill Hoffman (manager)
2011-01-20 10:32

    We should move this discussion to the cmake-developers mailing
list. This is not a good place for this type of discussion.
(0024957)
Mike Jackson (reporter)
2011-01-20 10:27

    I had about 4 or 5 replies typed here. The conclusion that I came
to is that the CMake developers should try to adhere to the principal
of least surprise, ie, when someone installs a new version of CMake
they would expect all of the current cmake projects to pick up the new
version. If we go versioning everything by folder names and
application names then drag-and-drop installs are going to fail in the
respect that if the user then uses the command line to configure
projects, those projects would still use the previous version of CMake
unless the user specifically deletes the old version.
   So for probably the majority of cases installing CMake *without*
the version number in the name is the right choice since things like
symlinks that point to "cmake" inside the app bundle wil automatically
pick up the new version.
   For those who need multiple versions (Clearly the minority) they
are probably smart enough to create versioned folders for each version
of CMake and again since CMake is totally self contained it is easy
enough to create these versions.

On Windows you are going to have a tougher time with this because you
would end up having both the command line and the GUI named "cmake" so
I am not really sure what to do on Windows. I would say leave Windows
alone as there really isn't any convention on Windows.

To summarize Kitware should create an application bundle for OS X
simply called "CMake.app" and install into the /Applications folder.
If a developer needs side-by-side versions then it is very straight
forward to create version folders in /Applications (or anywhere else
that CMake is installed).

Just my 2 cents.
Mike.
(0024956)
David Cole (manager)
2011-01-20 09:57

    The naming convention exception on the Mac seems to be when there
is a suite of apps, the folder name that they all live in is qualified
with a version indicator:

Examples:
  iWork '09
  Microsoft Office 2008

But then we'd just have the same discussion about the folder name, and
whether it should be "CMake 2.8" or "CMake 2.8.3" ... :-)
(0024955)
David Cole (manager)
2011-01-20 09:54

    Whatever is decided here should apply to CMake installations
across platforms, in my opinion.

I've always thought the Windows intaller should default to installing
in a "2.8.3" specific path, rather than it's default "2.8" path. That
way, I could have side-by-side installs without even having to change
the default path when I do the installations.

If we remove the version number on the Mac app entirely, should we
also remove the "2.8" from the Windows default installation path?
Should we also remove the "cmake-2.8" folder name from the Linux
install tree?

Should it just be "cmake" or "CMake" everywhere without any version
qualifications?

Or should we do on the Mac what we do now on Windows and Linux:
qualify it as CMake 2.8, but omit the patch level...

Whatever we choose, it would be really nice if there were a way to say
"CMake does it like this" and have that be uniformly true on a
cross-platform basis for all the platforms that CMake supports.
(0024654)
Eric Wing (developer)
2011-01-13 13:52
edited on: 2011-01-13 13:53

    I agree that the version number should be removed from the name.
Inconsistent names are a pain for automated scripts. Needing multiple
versions is an edge case that the majority of people probably don't
need to worry about. And it is easily fixable as Sean describes by
simply renaming the .app or moving it to another directory. Mac users
are very comfortable with this and doesn't require explanation. (By
the way, this is another reason drag-and-drop installs are good and
installers are bad.)

And to underscore Mike's point, Adobe is usually the example of what
not to do on the platform :)

(0024650)
Mike Jackson (reporter)
2011-01-13 11:55

    I think I was a part of that discussion. It was way back in
November 6, 2007 I believe with a Subject of "Qt version of Cmake". I
don't have all of it archived but that should get us close.

My Vote is for the removal of the Version from the CMake.app bundle
name but there are arguments and precedents both for and against
having the version number in the name, but MOST applications do NOT
put the Version in the name. On my system of about 50 apps installed
only about 5 or 6 have the version number in the name:
 Adobe products, "A Better Finder Rename XX", and a few other minor programs.
(0024649)
Bill Hoffman (manager)
2011-01-13 11:34

    I would like to find the discussion, because I am pretty sure that
what you are asking for, is to go back to the way it was before that
discussion...
(0024646)
Sean McBride (reporter)
2011-01-13 11:23

    You can have more than one version by renaming one or the other,
or by placing them in different folders. Renaming a .app does not
affect its ability to run.

But surely the typical case is that users want the newest version
only? I can see that developers would want to test backwards
compatibility with older versions, but for everyone else that just
needs CMake to build some random project, only the newest version is
needed.

PS: I do vaguely remember that discussion... I think it was on the list...
(0024644)
Bill Hoffman (manager)
2011-01-13 11:16

    But then how can you have more than one version installed at the
same time? As I recall there was a lengthy discussion about this when
I first created it this way. Not sure if it was on the mailing list or
the bug tracker...