[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [provisioning-dev] Profile inheritance

I think we also need administrative profile on windows or any OS for that matter. For the multiuser install there needs to be an administrative profile.
The ability to have disable/enable profiles for each user is right on. This is more or less how we work with the current eclipse.



Inactive hide details for Andrew Overholt <overholt@xxxxxxxxxx>Andrew Overholt <overholt@xxxxxxxxxx>


          Andrew Overholt <overholt@xxxxxxxxxx>
          Sent by: provisioning-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx

          08/07/2007 12:37 PM

          Please respond to
          "Developer discussions for provisioning \(Update Manager\) initiatives" <provisioning-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>

To

provisioning-dev <provisioning-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>

cc


Subject

[provisioning-dev] Profile inheritance

Hi,

The week before last I had some discussions with Pascal about how
Equinox provisioning stuff will interact with Linux distribution
packages.  Since then I've been struggling a bit to get my thoughts and
our discussions collected so I'd like to discuss them here to get
others' opinions.

One of the ideas we discussed was profile inheritance.  With that, we
would have a system-wide (administrator-managed) profile that is
populated with the entire set of bundles available via installed distro
packages (RPMs, .debs, whatever).  (I am thinking we'd have to manually
avoid conflicts in what we ship, but that's tangential here.)  We would
also have per-user profiles that allow for system-wide things to be
disabled/enabled and allows for per-user bundle installation.  Does this
make sense?

Thanks,

Andrew
(See attached file: signature.asc)_______________________________________________
provisioning-dev mailing list
provisioning-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/provisioning-dev

GIF image

GIF image

GIF image

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Binary data