You raise a point I have been thinking about and your comment about 3 parts:
immutable system, extensions, user
makes some sense.
This suggests a minor tweak to our current layout which is to add addons to
the user folder. This would remove the admin requirement for using JAL for
addons. But addons would then be duplicated and user specific in a multiuser
system. How much such we cater to multi-user systems where different users
have different addons?
So I come back to thinking that addons (at least for now) should be
considered as part of system and not part of user.
I also think that JAL will be used for updates to system and won't be
restricted to addons. There is no reason it can't be used to update the
standard library and even binaries and tools.
If system is in a secure folder and addons is in system, you will have to be
admin in order to use JAL.
I don't mind this as long as the user was encouraged to use a non-secure
folder and explicitly chose to make system secure.
The use of "program files..." in vista is a nightmare because of the virtual
backing store rules. In vista if a non admin program writes a file to
"program files..." it gets written to a virtual backing store in home. Tthis
same user runnning as admin sees the primary files and not the backing
store. And another user sees only the primrary files. This mess is not easy
to protect against and my only thought is to recommend as strongly as
possible against "program files..." in vista. And if it isn't a good idea in
vista (where most xp users will eventually be forced), why induldge in it
now in XP?
----- Original Message -----
From: "Oleg Kobchenko" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Beta forum" <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, October 04, 2007 2:11 AM
Subject: Re: [Jbeta] Mac 602 beta update
This works as expected, however it is a good example of
installation for a J-written end-user product rather than
J as development environment.
The previous layout was better, when all the files and folders
are observable and explore-able rather than hidden.
Some things may not even work, like Find in Files, open
system scripts with open dialog, etc. Writing addons into
the space of conceptually immutable app doesn't feel right either.
However, the dmg package is better than tgz.
A closest system to compare is Eclipse: it has three parts:
immutable Java runtime, extensible IDE and user workspace.
--- Eric Iverson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Following the many suggestions I have repackaged J602 for Mac. There are
still serious rough edges but it feels like progress. I have not updated
the
web site beta download page as I'd like to get some feedback first.
Mac 602 beta users:
http://www.jsoftware.com/download/j602abeta_intel.dmg
http://www.jsoftware.com/download/j602abeta_powerpc.dmg
____________________________________________________________________________________
Boardwalk for $500? In 2007? Ha! Play Monopoly Here and Now (it's updated
for today's economy) at Yahoo! Games.
http://get.games.yahoo.com/proddesc?gamekey=monopolyherenow
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
