3 ms·

> but I don’t typically feel like shelling out $1000 to buy a machine specifically for an OS I don’t use I keep seeing this argument and it honestly just sound

> but I don’t typically feel like shelling out $1000 to buy a machine specifically for an OS I don’t use I keep seeing this argument and it honestly just sounds rather lazy when a few seconds of Googling will point you towards build services you can use without having to purchase a Macbook (for instance, TravisCI has an OS X build environment). Or if you're opposed to cloud-hosted build tools for some reason you could ask users/the user requesting a macOS binary would mind working with you to test your build script(s) for compatibility and mention that Mac users will have to build from source in your README. This whole "well I would if Macs weren't so expensive" sounds like "I just don't want to support macOS" because you have options if you actually were interested.

aikah 8y ago
> This whole "well I would if Macs weren't so expensive" sounds like "I just don't want to support macOS" because you have options if you actually were interested. Mac development is a bit more complicated than running MacOS on a CI, especially with GUI apps. And of course code authors prefer compiling programs themselves on their infrastructure. If you want to volunteer and provide a Mac Build then get the source do it and distribute it. But don't accuse people of being somehow lazy for not supporting mac, that's preposterous. Apple is responsible for the situation. Don't shift the blame away from them.
- filleduchaos 8y ago
  > Mac development is a bit more complicated than running MacOS on a CI, especially with GUI apps. And this is a cross-platform project that's not exactly Cocoa-heavy (being based on Electron). The person I responded to did not say anything about creating GUIs either, so I am not sure what your point is. > And of course code authors prefer compiling programs themselves on their infrastructure. Which is why Travis, Circle, Appveyor and co have zero users, as we all know. > If you want to volunteer and provide a Mac Build then get the source do it and distribute it It's almost as if that was one of the things I suggested - working with the requester to provide a binary > But don't accuse people of being somehow lazy for not supporting mac, that's preposterous. I said the argument is lazy, not the people. If for some reason (ideological or whatever) you're not interested in supporting macOS, then say so outright. Don't pretend as though the only obstacle between you and distributing your otherwise cross-platform software for macOS is not having a literal Mac in your hands because there are other easy options, like taking on a contributor or using a build service.

aikah 8y ago

> This whole "well I would if Macs weren't so expensive" sounds like "I just don't want to support macOS" because you have options if you actually were interested. Mac development is a bit more complicated than running MacOS on a CI, especially with GUI apps. And of course code authors prefer compiling programs themselves on their infrastructure. If you want to volunteer and provide a Mac Build then get the source do it and distribute it. But don't accuse people of being somehow lazy for not supporting mac, that's preposterous. Apple is responsible for the situation. Don't shift the blame away from them.

filleduchaos 8y ago
> Mac development is a bit more complicated than running MacOS on a CI, especially with GUI apps. And this is a cross-platform project that's not exactly Cocoa-heavy (being based on Electron). The person I responded to did not say anything about creating GUIs either, so I am not sure what your point is. > And of course code authors prefer compiling programs themselves on their infrastructure. Which is why Travis, Circle, Appveyor and co have zero users, as we all know. > If you want to volunteer and provide a Mac Build then get the source do it and distribute it It's almost as if that was one of the things I suggested - working with the requester to provide a binary > But don't accuse people of being somehow lazy for not supporting mac, that's preposterous. I said the argument is lazy, not the people. If for some reason (ideological or whatever) you're not interested in supporting macOS, then say so outright. Don't pretend as though the only obstacle between you and distributing your otherwise cross-platform software for macOS is not having a literal Mac in your hands because there are other easy options, like taking on a contributor or using a build service.