re: [platform-update-dev] redesigned install wizard

[Dorian Birsan <birsan@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Thanks Philippe, this is very good feedback.
Sorry I wasn't very clear about mirrors.
The intentions is to still support them, but they will have to be reworked
(same spec, but different GUI). 
The need to search and download features
in background, without hogging the entire eclipse workbench has forced
the redesign of the install wizard. The side effect of the redesign was
(temporarily) dropping the support for mirrors, but this should be fixed
eventually.

-Dorian

"Philippe Ombredanne" <pombredanne@xxxxxxxx>
Sent by: platform-update-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx

03/30/2005 04:09 PM

Please respond to
"Eclipse Platform Update component developers list."

To	<platform-update-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
cc	"'Francois Granade'" <fg@xxxxxxxx>
Subject	re: [platform-update-dev] redesigned install wizard

On Sun, 13 Feb 2005, Dorian wrote :
> 4. There is one drawback: the support for mirrors has not been ported
to the new redesigned wizard. If anybody has suggestion (or patches :-)
for  >how to handle this please post here or open a bug report.
With
these changes, I think the support for mirroring won't be as important
as in the past. 
I would kindly disagree... I pulled my hair last night trying to figure
out why mirrors were NOT working anymore after m4...
Mirroring is IMHO an important feature.
Please bring them back....there are needed.
I unfortunately do not have a patch for that but would be happy to work
with you there.



>By the way, has anybody used the update site mirrors? 
Obviously we do. They work fine so far, albeit polishing a bit here and
there would be nice. One of the important feature could be to have
explicit tag in the mirrors files to support a geo/location attribute.
This is after all one of the main reason to have mirrors: spread the
load over the world, and could provide a way for users to sort the
mirrors by that tag when prompted to select one. Having a separate
mirror file is actually a good thing: the mirror file can be generated
dynamically, and a different schedule that the site.xml.

>Another take on this would be to combine the existing update site 
>policy with update site mirrors, perhaps by settings on the preference
page.
Could work out too. Now the big difference is that mirrors may come and
go, and users have little control on that. The owner of an update site
is the only one who can determine mirrors with confidence.


Sorry for the late feedback, but I had missed that post.
Cordially

-- 
Cheers
Philippe

philippe ombredanne | nexB - Open by Design (tm)
1 650 799 0949 | pombredanne at nexb.com 
http://www.nexb.com


_______________________________________________
platform-update-dev mailing list
platform-update-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/platform-update-dev