cocoon-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Upayavira ...@odoko.co.uk>
Subject Re: [RT] A Cocoon installer with IzPack
Date Sun, 20 Nov 2005 18:58:38 GMT
Sylvain Wallez wrote:
> Joerg Heinicke wrote:
> 
>> On 20.11.2005 16:13, Upayavira wrote:
>>
>>>>>> What about using it to build a neat installer for Cocoon?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Could it handle the dependency resolution bit? That's the
>>>>> callenging bit.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> We should keep installation and deployment separate.
>>>>
>>>> I have nothing against tools that unpack and install core cocoon into a
>>>> specified dir, maybe even add desktop shortcuts for starting/stopping
>>>> etc. Deployment however should be handled in a different tool, separate
>>>> from the installer.
>>>>
>>>> I expect maven to handle most of the tricky stuff like the dependency
>>>> resolution, we should just hand it a pom and off it goes.
>>
>>
>> Same here.
>>
>>> It depends which version you are talking about 2.1 or 2.2. If we're
>>> talking 2.2, then yes, Maven will do a lot of it.
>>
>>
>> 2.2 of course. Nobody wants to maintain Maven stuff additionally for
>> 2.1 I guess.
>>
>>> If we're talking 2.1
>>> then no, Maven won't do any. In fact, we already have some code in the
>>> whiteboard that can do the necessary dependency resolution with 2.1
>>> blocks (see http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/cocoon/whiteboard/guilder).
>>>
>>> With 2.1, the installer would need to do dependency resolution and a
>>> build - without this, it would be hardly worth having.
>>
>>
>> Do you really want to add such an additional feature to 2.1 branch? If
>> we already have one (like Ugo's Guilder) we shall go with that one.
>> But I would not add anything new like an installer based on IzPack.
> 
> 
> Ok...
> 
> IzPack has been under my radar for a long time as a cool thing, and its
> licence change to the ASL made me consider it would be worth mentioning
> it here.
> 
> Now I certainly don't want to start a "my installer is better than
> yours" or "maven or nothing" debate.
> 
> So forget it!

Actually I interpret the communities response as "too late for 2.1 and
too early for 2.2".

We need to stop adding features to 2.1, and we've got a lot to fix
before we'll be able to work out what an installer should do on 2.2.

So, don't forget it, just hold onto the idea for a while!

Regards, Upayavira




Mime
View raw message