>
> >>but then you are back to not being able to tweak things for the Linux
> >>folks.
> >
> >Perhaps have installer.xml check if it up to date and if not replace
> >itself? Given there's alternative way to install I don;t see it as a big
> >issue. Of course what Linux users really want to the SDK
On 10/10/14 15:38, Alex Harui wrote:
I don¹t know if a script can replace itself,
It'll work on Linux, but Windows will probably moan the file is in use.
Tom
On 10/10/14, 12:40 AM, "Justin Mclean" wrote:
>>but then you are back to not being able to tweak things for the Linux
>>folks.
>
>Perhaps have installer.xml check if it up to date and if not replace
>itself? Given there's alternative way to install I don;t see it as a big
>issue. Of course what
Hi,
> I¹m still confused. If you change the installer to offer FlexUnit as an
> optional step, how will we offer the same option to Linux users?
If it an optional step you will need an installer script right? Linux user can
use that if they really want OR they can just download and unzip in the
Given the market share of Linux and the generally more technically
proficient users of that platform (i.e. capable of, and used to installing
multiple dependencies separately from the command line), I don’t think we
should sacrifice improved functionality for the vast majority just to keep
feature
Trying to get back to one thread...
On 10/9/14, 11:43 PM, "Justin Mclean" wrote:
>>
>Which would have minimal impact on them, Flex Unit doesn't (as far a sI
>know) really have any install steps as such it just download, check md5,
>and unpack. For the stand alone install is doesn't need an insta
Hi,
> I think Justin is suggesting that we store more of the installer
> intelligence on the server.
Yes currently it spread out between 3 xml files, and given we depend on things
who location could change and gives us a more flexibility in changing how
previous versions are installed.
> Just
Hi,
> Are you suggesting that we change the install experience for 4.13.0 and
> older releases?
Yes I can see users wanting to install Flex Unit (or Tour De Flex) as an
optional install while installing the SDK.
> One advantage of having all of the steps in the ant script is that our Linux
> u
I think Justin is suggesting that we store more of the installer
intelligence on the server. Justin, do you see a copy of the installer
scripts live on the server, ready for us to manipulate without a VOTE? I
like that suggestion, it would separate the interests of the various part
even better (i.e
On 10/9/14, 5:21 PM, "Justin Mclean" wrote:
>The second requires it being added to the SDK install scripts. This is a
>little problematic in that the steps are part of each SDK release in the
>dist area. I'm assuming we can't we change the contents of those without
>VOTEing on a release.
>
>Woul
10 matches
Mail list logo
