Uwe Stöhr wrote: > Joost Verburg schrieb: > > >> >> Two entirely different scripts for the two installers is unacceptable >> for me. It would mean that the installers have different bugs, behave >> differently etc. That is really difficult to maintain.
I wonder about some phrases: Joost, Bo "... it is unacceptable to me ..." Have I missed something? Where are we? Isn't this an open source project any more? Are you now the managers who I have to ask? Please check your language. > My problem is that I'm perhaps technically limited to uderstand your > code. I started to merge some things to your code in September and asked > you lots of things as I didn't understand the code. Yes, I gave it up > this time. Then you were not reachable for two months so I had a look > again to fix bugs occurred in the meantime. The starting point was the > famous Acrobat 8 DDE crash. With my code base I was able to fix this in > overall two hours but I don't know how to fix this with yours. > > I promise support for everything I create and maintain so I need a code > base I can understand. I can read installer codes of other projects and > know how to fix the bugs there (I did this for example for jEdit and > JabRef.) but everytime I look into your code I fail - it costs me too > much time to understand the code. > One of my problems with the code are the $x, $Rx, Push and Pop commands > you often use. The actions behind them are difficult to understand and I > won't know half a year later what is done in these routines. > (Btw. it would help a lot if every function/macro call is explained, at > least where the fuction is defined.) > > Besides the discussion about bundling or not, the support is the main > problem I see and have. To give support for the installer: > - you need a easy to understand and well documented code. > - you need a bugzilla account to have a look at the latest bugs (not > every bug is correctly marked as installer bug). > - you have to read the users list to be up to date about the current > problems and because not everybody knows bugzilla to report a bug > > All this consumes much time and I'm happy when I can fix bugs in a short > time. > (This month I took me too much time for LyX, I will reduce this, so in > the then shorter time for LyX I have to continue the doc cleanup, > installer maintenance, and support on the users-list and in bugzilla.) > >> There is also the official bundled installed. Why don't you want your >> features to be merged with that one? > > I have never said this. I just don't want to fight again and again to > have features included that are already there. For example the MiKTeX > stuff is there since August (started in June), the feature of installing > LyX's cls-files to MiKTeX was there before you came to LyX as I remember > correctly. I brought these to discussion at least twice. > >> Uwe, can you please send a detailed list of missing features? We are >> not talking about major differences here. > > You find the list as always here: > http://wiki.lyx.org/Windows/LyXWinInstaller > >> Would you agree with a single >> installer code base if I invest the time to merge everything that is >> accepted by the developers? > > I see no real solution due to the things I described above. I accept > your installer as the official one but I need my code base for the > support. I removed my code from SVN to calm down the discussion. We Uwe, please don't remove your code from svn. Just work on, and stop posting to this thread, it makes no sense. There are pros and cons but we don't have to find a decision now. Maybe Joost improves the documentation of his code, maybe you become more familiar with his code, maybe Joost takes a look at your code, I don't know, but the time and motivation we've lost in this thread is enough for a third installer. Peter > already have your code as installer base so I already agreed to this. My > code upload to SVN had nothing to do with this. > My proposal for this thread is the only thing I can imagine that could > works. > I don't see a problem of having two different installers, either > following my proposal or like the current situation where the users can > choose between an installer they like. Both will be freedom of choice. > > regards Uwe >
