On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 11:45 AM, David Nalley <da...@gnsa.us> wrote: > On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 8:23 AM, Wido den Hollander <w...@widodh.nl> wrote: >> On 09/11/2012 12:16 PM, Suresh Sadhu wrote: >>> >>> HI All, >>> >>> Installer fail to read the cloud packages and MS installation on Ubuntu >>> 12.04 was not successful(No packages were installed) Raised a blocker bug. >>> Please find the issue details in the below mentioned issue: >>> >> >> I'd like to bring this up again, do we REALLY want this install.sh script? > > > This really deserves its own thread, because it won't receive the > attention it deserves in the original thread. > > I talked with infra about this a few weeks back, and while they said > they really wanted downstreams to package, they weren't vehemently > opposed to use creating our own repo, but we'd have to figure out how > to make it work with the mirror system. > > Personally - the packages as they exist are great for people doing a > first, small scale install, but it doesn't scale. While I am not > necessarily opposed to the installer, I also recognize the problems > from a real world deployment perspective. > > However, there is an impact, at a minimum all of our documentation > will need rewriting, so personally, I'd prefer that for 4.0.0 - that > we do repos if we can figure it out in time, and keep the installer as > an option as well. > > --David >
Thanks for starting the thread David (you beat me to it). My thoughts: Having downstream packagers is the way to go for official package distribution of the software for each OS. However, I would like us to include the RPMs and DEB packages that we agreed to previously (Ubuntu 12.04 and RHEL/CentOS 6.2 and 6.3) as a binary distro via ASF infrastructure. I'd also like us to include this install script (functionally working for its intended purpose) with the RPMs. My thinking is similar to David's, in that it's easy to get started with that model. I don't believe that the tarball that includes packages and the install script hurts more advanced installers at all, since we can have other methods of getting the packages (perhaps ALSO hosting the packages on public repos that use the ASF mirrors, or even on repos that aren't on ASF infrastructure). Just my thoughts... looking for others to chime in. -chip
