Re: Mac OS 10.4.x and PCGen support
- Hi Hoshi,
Thanks for your feedback! If you are interested in working on the new LST Editor then please let me know, we can get you started!
> Thank you for thinking about the Macies. Mac is the only computer I run. However, if worse come to worse, we always have Wine. It doesn't as smoothly but it does work.
> p.s. I just started using PCGen, I am very impressed. Thank You. If i can find the time i'd like to start working on an editing program for lst files, something similar to the rules editor in eTools.
> From: Martijn Verburg <martijnverburg@...>
> To: email@example.com
> Sent: Wednesday, July 22, 2009 1:28:41 AM
> Subject: [pcgen] Mac OS 10.4.x and PCGen support
> PCGen is investigating dropping support for Mac OS 10.4.x for the next version of PCGen (6.0.0), this is due to the version of Java that is tied to Mac OS.
> So we'd like to know how many of you out there are 'stuck' with only being able to use Mac OS 10.4.x for PCGen. e.g. It's your primary machine and/or it's the only machine you have available to run PCGen on.
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
- Hi there,
Thanks for your feedback, answers inline!
> There are a few things you may want to keep in mind when makingActually this is a reason why this question was posed, Java reaches end of life October 2009, although there's no reason why we couldn't continue with it (we're not a corporation worried about Java security updates etc).
> this decision. First, 10.4 is the newest version that many pre-G5
> PPC machines can run without a fair amount of hacking. Second,
> 10.5 will be the final release to support PPC processors at all.
> Given the above, I must throw in my hat with those who have voiced
> concern over the "latest and greatest" philosophy in choosing Java
> environments. Setting aside the straw-man "500 hours of
> development to support 3 people" argument, the version of Java
> chosen should be the oldest supported version that can accomplish
> the job.
> It doesn't make any sense to move to a new version of the platform
> unless there is a compelling reason to do so (e.g. the current
> development version has been EOL'ed). If that's the case, then
> move forward and don't look back. But if not, and given the fact
> that this question is even being posed it probably isn't, then it
> would be better to stay with the version that supports the most
> For the record, I use a mix of 10.4 and 10.5 and will probablyWhat trackers numbers are these in particular?
> continue to use PCGen regardless of whether you support 10.4 -- in
> fact, I'm still using PCGen 5.10.1 because of it's such a hassle
> to fix the output sheets every time you guys issue an update (yes,
> I've submitted bug and change request, but have been accused of
> being too US-centric for my troubles)
> and because of theWe actually provide a mechanism for custom data and having that preserved between versions, can you provide some concrete details of your problem?
> bone-headed decision to stash *all* of the .lst files inside the
> application bundle without any provision for adding an additional
> external directory for user-generated or modified content. (Yes, I
> know that I can change the document directory path but no, I
> shouldn't have to go through that BS every time I upgrade.)
- hi. since Apple has dropped support for all macs running 10.4, and only ships new computers with versions of 10.6 since earlier this year, we probably need to be thinking in terms of having builds that work on whatever versions of java are available for 10.6, as mac sales are growing and a lot of people are abandoning their G4's, G5's, and older macs.
- Hi Folks!
> hi. since Apple has dropped support for all macs running 10.4, andPCGen currently requires JAVA 1.5 which is supported by Mac OSX 10.6.x.
> only ships new computers with versions of 10.6 since earlier this
> year, we probably need to be thinking in terms of having builds that
> work on whatever versions of java are available for 10.6, as mac
> sales are growing and a lot of people are abandoning their G4's,
> G5's, and older macs.
And I have a G5 and a Mac Mini G4 and do not plan to upgrade within
the next 6 months. And when I do, I will still have the G5 available
for folks to use when they come to my house for games, so I for onew
would like to maintain compatibility with Mac OSX 10.5.x.