geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Sachin Patel <sppat...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: v1.x Installer comments - Long
Date Fri, 27 Jan 2006 15:56:50 GMT

On Jan 27, 2006, at 10:46 AM, Aaron Mulder wrote:

> I would prefer if we did not let a user install both web  
> containers.  :)

Me too.

>
> I'd like to try out the installer soon.
>
> Thanks,
>     Aaron
>
> On 1/27/06, Erik Daughtrey <erikd@schemacity.org> wrote:
>>
>> Ah, I knew that you'd asked for this, but I didn't realize that  
>> you had a
>> strong conviction.  I suppose I should've asked ;)
>>
>> I'll leave it alone for now and focus on cleaning up a few things  
>> left.
>>
>> It would be great if a few others could try the installer and  
>> provide some
>> feedback quickly.
>>
>> Feedback is welcome.  Thanks.
>>
>> regards,
>>
>> Erik
>>
>>
>>  On Friday 27 January 2006 10:19, David Jencks wrote:
>>> On Jan 27, 2006, at 5:54 AM, Erik Daughtrey wrote:
>>>> Given the comments I've gotten, I'm going to change the installer
>>>> and go back
>>>> to the behavior where it does not allow the selection of both web
>>>> container
>>>> packs to install. I'm going to ditch the additional buttons which
>>>> allow
>>>> selected features to be inactive at runtime.
>>>>
>>>> We could put this up for a vote, but since there have been very few
>>>> comments
>>>> on this topic, I assume that most folks just want an installer that
>>>> works
>>>> well.
>>>
>>> I pretty much strongly prefer the way the installer works now, I
>>> think I asked for it to be this way :-)
>>>
>>> I won't stand in anyones way though.
>>>
>>> My view is that the installer should present all the options
>>> reasonably available.  They are MUCH easier to configure in the
>>> installer than in any other way, and I think that the additional
>>> confusion while using the installer is minimal.
>>>
>>> thanks
>>> david jencks
>>>
>>


Mime
View raw message