Is there a specific reason why we are targeting FP 11.1 as opposed to 11.4 or 11.5?
On Tue, Jan 1, 2013 at 3:29 AM, Om <bigosma...@gmail.com> wrote: > The config is not part of the source. There is only a reference to its url > in the installer app. The installer was designed with this scenario in > mind. > > A copy is included as a convenience to the developer who uses it. In that > sense it is more like a .properties file. > > We need to be able to change the sdk version without having to push an > update to the installer. Bundling the config xml with the source or binary > will cause issues . > > Thanks, > Om > On Jan 1, 2013 12:06 AM, "Justin Mclean" <jus...@classsoftware.com> wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > > Apache only officially releases (and we are voting on) a source > > distribution for the installer. > > Would a run time loaded config file be really considered part of that > > source? Basically it's the same as the build.properties for the Flex SDK. > > While the build.properties is part of the source release kit you > generally > > need to edit and change the values in it. > > > > The XML file is not compiled into the source it can also be > changed/edited > > by the user to install other versions of the SDK or AIR. A "typical" > > version of it is included in the source (just like build.properties) see > > "sdk-insaller-config-2.0.xml" in the root src directory. > > > > Would you consider the disclaimer page to be part of the source? It's on > > the wiki and linked to by the application. Or the cgi scipt it uses to > get > > the mirror? Where exactly do you draw the line? > > > > Either way when a vote is called for it only requires three more +1 than > > -1 votes and I don't see this as a reason for voting -1. > > > > Justin > > > > >
