World: r3wp
[!REBOL2 Releases] Discuss 2.x releases
older newer | first last |
Graham 29-Dec-2009 [608] | I never needed to do that ..always have a smtp server around and just use the gmail account as the reply to address |
amacleod 29-Dec-2009 [609] | I was contemplating using gmail for all users as I did not want to maintain my own mailserver plus it would give them access under their gmail usernames to use various tools provided by it... |
Graham 29-Dec-2009 [610x2] | I wrote one ... just have to find it .. the site I posted it to is down. |
In other words .. I never used it. | |
BrianH 29-Dec-2009 [612x2] | Graham, thanks for copying over those priorities from R2-Beta to here. About how those choices were made and phrased: The R2-Beta world was used when we still thought of REBOL being updated more rarely, in larger increments. This is no longer the case, we are adopting the rapid release model, though more regulary than the R3 alphas. We need to shift our thinking accordingly. Rapid release means that each individual R2 release doesn't have to include fixes for every outstanding bug. We can and will triage and prioritize, and your favorite bug may be moved to the next release. Which won't be a problem because that's coming next month, or the month after. Minor point releases will not be a major deal from now on, they will be monthly occurances. The overall plan for the R2 2.7.x series is to fix what we can in R2 in a way that doesn't break things. This won't be a ground-up rewrite, as we are doing one of those already. No major model changes, just tweaks. There is a lot we can tweak though, including natives. We are trying to avoid disruptive changes that affect scripts at runtime, except in cases where things just didn't work before. Almost all code that works on 2.7.6 should continue to work - that is our goal. Don't expect broken code to stay broken though :) The 2.7.7 release will not be ambitious, we just don't have the time. The priorities are business model changes and low-hanging fruit. The one piece of major breakage from the 2.7.x series that needs fixing in this release is the installer. If you have other priority fixes that can't wait til next month, and you are willing to do the work in this week, please speak up. |
If people can get on the R2-Beta world and start discussing things by end of Tuesday pacific time, we can use that, otherwise all discussions will have to be here in this group. If that turns out to be the case, please keep the discussion on topic. During the next release period we can properly switch to the community development infrastructure we use to make R3. Yes, that includes R3 chat. | |
Henrik 29-Dec-2009 [614] | Brian, private msg. |
BrianH 29-Dec-2009 [615] | One personal note: In Monday and Tuesday of this week (local time) I have a day job. Please accept my apologies for not being as active here during that time. By Tuesday evening I will be able to more actively participate in the development of 2.7.7, but for now I can only coordinate. |
Graham 29-Dec-2009 [616] | Where's your documentation about what is broken for the (windows) installer? |
BrianH 29-Dec-2009 [617x3] | It's been broken for so long, I no longer have the computer where I originally wrote it back in 2000 and posted it to the mailing list. It's still in my head though, so I'll collect it by Tuesday evening and start working. In brief: - I don't know about installation on platforms other than Windows. Someone else will have to chime in here. Too ambitious for 2.7.7. - Windows 2000+ support is still broken. Multi-user support is broken (same thing, really). - Folder usage was mostly fixed in 2.6.3, but the registry is still misused. Registry migration will be needed. - Non-admin installation should be possible, including user-specific file associations. - Installation was broken altogether in the 2.7.x series - it doesn't work at all, not even to 2.6.3 levels. - No-install usage of View needs better support. This means UI support too, if need be. VIew should be able to be a portable app. Keep in mind that portable app usage of directories is completely different than installed usage, and needs to be. |
Fixing Windows 2000+ support will also enable Vista and Win7 - the rules are the same. | |
Should the R2-compatible mezzanine fixes from R2/Forward be integrated as well? The answer to that depends on the timeframe, Carl. | |
Graham 29-Dec-2009 [620x4] | we have two days! |
I don't see the installer being fixed in 2 days | |
The R2/forwards stuff is all tested ?? | |
can you post a release so we can test it if not? | |
BrianH 29-Dec-2009 [624] | Yes, and the most recent release is already in R3 chat. The installer can be fixed in an evening at most. |
Graham 29-Dec-2009 [625] | for those of us not in R3 chat ... |
BrianH 29-Dec-2009 [626] | ...you'll be left out of 2.7.8 development. Get in there. |
Pekr 29-Dec-2009 [627] | As for installer, me, as a fan of copy&run principle, I would like simple option as Altme client has - on first screen, please allow "run from current location", and never ask again ... |
Graham 29-Dec-2009 [628] | Pekr, that won't work with windows 7 |
Pekr 29-Dec-2009 [629x2] | ... I expect that when you lauch .exe on system where REBOL is not yet installed, the installation process will run, right? |
no? | |
BrianH 29-Dec-2009 [631] | That is the portable app method, which can't set file associations. |
Graham 29-Dec-2009 [632] | Nope ... |
Pekr 29-Dec-2009 [633] | Hmm, installers, default dirs, etc., that's kind of deep topic :-) |
BrianH 29-Dec-2009 [634] | Which I've already thought through. I've written installers for R2 before and other apps. |
Graham 29-Dec-2009 [635] | To get altme to run from the my c:\altme directory, I either have to run as admin, or, I have to write enable myself on the directory |
BrianH 29-Dec-2009 [636x2] | Right. That's why portable apps are usually run from USB keys with FAT filesystems. |
In the long run I would prefer to make the installer configurable and encappable, but for now a View-specific one will do. | |
Graham 29-Dec-2009 [638] | So, rebol has to go to <program files>\rebol ? And it has to write in user documents somewhere? |
Pekr 29-Dec-2009 [639] | Graham - exactly .... but - I hate that model ... |
Graham 29-Dec-2009 [640] | and when you start a rebol console .. you end up deep in user documents somewhere ... |
Pekr 29-Dec-2009 [641] | there might be even 3 paths - rebol app (program files), rebol cache (user profile .... bla bla \roaming\rebol), rebol data user profile\documents\rebol ... |
BrianH 29-Dec-2009 [642] | Pekr, it's required for secure multi-user use on Windows. Hating it won't change that. No flame wars please - we don't have the time. |
Pekr 29-Dec-2009 [643] | most of the time, I can guarantee you, that users feel lost, once they are supposed to navigate to their docs in file-manager ... |
BrianH 29-Dec-2009 [644] | File placement is easy, and mostly handled by 2.6.3 - the real trick is registry usage. |
Pekr 29-Dec-2009 [645] | BrianH - I am fine with whatever crap windows require. I have my most needed stuff on C:, in !mp3, !REBOL, !Foto etc. dirs. I run as an admin, so I don't care ... |
Graham 29-Dec-2009 [646] | So, if a program that is being installed needs Rebol ... where should it look? |
BrianH 29-Dec-2009 [647] | Right. File placement is a matter of chosing the default folders of the installer, as it does now. You can change those choices. |
Graham 29-Dec-2009 [648] | Python seems to install to c:\python2n\ |
BrianH 29-Dec-2009 [649] | As in almost all cases, Python is a bad example. |
Pekr 29-Dec-2009 [650] | BrianH: so where can users (not admin) safely put his rebol scripts, so that rebol executalbe can write and read from such a directory? We can't do it in program files, but can we do in somewhere on C:\REBOL? |
BrianH 29-Dec-2009 [651] | The trick is registry usage. The folder locations can be looked up in the registry.at runtime, as long as those registry settings are in the right location of the registry. I'll have those exact locations Tuesday evening. |
Pekr 29-Dec-2009 [652] | ... or only user profile dirs is the right placement? |
Graham 29-Dec-2009 [653x2] | c:\rebol is out ... unless you write enable |
d:\rebol is fine though :) | |
BrianH 29-Dec-2009 [655x2] | Pekr, it's not abot where the user can pt their user scripts, it's about the desktop files and such. File associations manage the user script issue. |
User scripts can go wherever you like. | |
Graham 29-Dec-2009 [657] | will the installer be written in rebol? |
older newer | first last |