[izpack-devel] Proposed new changes

[Ryan Shillington]

Hello Klaus,

To answer your first question - if pack A and C depend on B, then when
you check either A or C, then B will be checked.  If you have all 3
selected and you uncheck B, then both A and B will be unchecked as well.

As for your second question - I haven't had any issues but that's
probably because my advanced installation panel uses the full area.
It's like ExtendedInstallPanel but provides a lot more feedback as to
what's happening.

As for your last question, the Sun JVMs support JARs up to 4GBs in size
(unsigned ints).  As this is also the practical limit for a DVD, I don't
imagine that we'll see people using IzPack to go over this soon.

Ryan

-----Original Message-----
From: izpack-devel-bounces at lists.berlios.de
[mailto:izpack-devel-bounces at lists.berlios.de] On Behalf Of Bartz, Klaus
Sent: Thursday, August 03, 2006 2:24 AM
To: izpack-devel at lists.berlios.de
Subject: Re: [izpack-devel] Proposed new changes

Hi Ryan,
sounds good...
Some comments context related.

Cheers

Klaus


>-----Original Message-----
>From: izpack-devel-bounces at lists.berlios.de
>[mailto:izpack-devel-bounces at lists.berlios.de]On Behalf Of Ryan
>Shillington
>Sent: Wednesday, August 02, 2006 6:58 PM
>To: izpack-devel at lists.berlios.de
>Subject: [izpack-devel] Proposed new changes
>
>
>Hello folks,
>
>I've made a number of changes that I would like to contribute back to
>IzPack.  I'm sending them to you to see if anybody has any
>objections to
>them:
>* I've changed the TableModel for the PacksPanel so that the
>dependencies work both ways.  Assume that you have packs A and B, where
>A depends on B.  Currently if you click on A it won't allow
>itself to be
>checked until B is checked.  I've changed it so that if you click on A
>then B will be checked automatically.  I would like to make this an
>option whether you want this functionality or the original
>functionality.  I'm proposing that this functionality be the default.

If possible, changes or extension should be compatible to the old
behavior. That's what you will do, good.
I am not happy with the current behavior, but until jet it was tolerable
for me.
What about A and C depends on B? Means you need B if you would install
A and/or C. That's my situation. Do you have an Idee to handle it with
your changed behavior?
An other point with which I am not so happy: The description area uses
an other font as the rest. Should be peanuts, but until jet a have had
no time for it.

>  * I've created a much, much more complex, but also nicer InstallPanel
>that has pretty checkmarks and shows the status of the install on the
>left while files are being copied and the ant tasks are running.  Our
>install is really complicated - containing about 1.2 GB of software.
>We've integrated a number of third party applications to our
>application
>that need to be configured individually.  I'd like to offer an
>"AdvancedInstallPanel" that handles some of these more complex
>scenarios.

Sounds like you support also custom actions as the
"ExtendedInstallPanel"
(you ask about ant tasks). That will be a precondition for me to use it
in my installation.
If you read this mailing list, you know that I am just at changing
layout of IzPanels. The "full area using" panels like the PacksPanel are
not affected, but the InstallPanel. I do it because the standard layouts
makes problems for me e.g. at a back step (sometimes the layout will be
changed). Additional I need panels where the anchor is NORTHWEST; the
standared in IzPack is CENTER.
If your panel uses not allways the full panel area, it should also use
the new layout. Unfortunately I am just during changing and there is
also
no docu in the moment. I hope I can checkin this week the first changed
panels which then can be used as example.

>  * I'd like to fix a number of IzPack bugs related to installing more
>than 2GB of software.  Currently IzPack uses integers to pass
>around the
>size of modules/disk space where we need to use longs.  As I'm
>sure most
>of you know, integerss can't be used to calculate spaces for more than
>2GB.  Fixing this will also allow you to see the real size of the disk
>space available.
>

Your calculation of space changes are checked in by Julien.

Are you capable to create and handle a jar file greater than 2 GB with
a standard 1.4.x VM? I never tested it, but I rember that there was
a problem earlier...


>Any comments?  Suggestions?  Opposition?
>
>Ryan
>
>
>IMPORTANT NOTICE:
>This message may contain confidential information. If you have
>received this e-mail in error, do not use, copy or distribute
>it. Do not open any attachments. Delete it immediately from
>your system and notify the sender promptly by e-mail that you
>have done so. Thank you.
>
>_______________________________________________
>izpack-devel mailing list
>izpack-devel at lists.berlios.de
>http://bat.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/izpack-devel
>
_______________________________________________
izpack-devel mailing list
izpack-devel at lists.berlios.de
http://bat.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/izpack-devel



IMPORTANT NOTICE:
This message may contain confidential information. If you have received this e-mail in error, do not use, copy or distribute it. Do not open any attachments. Delete it immediately from your system and notify the sender promptly by e-mail that you have done so. Thank you.