On Thu, Oct 9, 2014 at 12:43 PM, Alex Harui <aha...@adobe.com> wrote:
> > > On 10/9/14, 12:34 PM, "OmPrakash Muppirala" <bigosma...@gmail.com> wrote: > > >On Thu, Oct 9, 2014 at 12:26 PM, Alex Harui <aha...@adobe.com> wrote: > > > >> The set of required and optional steps for new installs is determined > >>by a > >> config file. The FlexJS install, for example, doesn¹t offer or install > >> OSMF. I think we can control everything from the config file and > >> installer.xml, which would be desirable for our Linux users anyway. > >> > >> > >But, won't removing the OSMF required item from installer.xml remove it > >from the list of licenses as well? We still want to show that because the > >user has to explicitly agree to MPL license before proceeding with the > >installation. > > > >I guess the Installer needs to interpret a new variable from the > >installer.xml that says 'For this component, just display license, don't > >download it'. Right? > > > IMO, the LICENSE we show for the main package would have the MPL stuff in > it, not just the AL license, so then there wouldn¹t be a checkbox to check. > Ah, this is so much better than what I had proposed. Just add the MPL license text and url along with the Apache license text and link for the Flex SDK selection. > > But I think we could do it your way as well without changing the > Installer. IIRC, having options to choose from just sets flags for the > ant script. What the ant script does is independent. > I now feel this is harder than your suggestion :-) Whichever option you think is easier. > > The Installer (for new installs) now only does 3 things: > 1) Displays a product selector that gets a set of products from > sdk-installer-config-4.0.xml > 2) If a non-legacy product is selected, it looks up a config file for the > list of required and optional licenses/components > 3) Once all required licenses are selected, launches an ant script with > various ant properties set. > Thanks, Om > > -Alex > >
