> A big +1 on the keeping of the nice UI, it is one of the reasons the current > Installer is such a big success.
How do you know it's one of the reasons of the success? >From my own end-user experience, I would say that the nice installer UI was >appealing the first time (wow effect), and engaged me to download and run it. But the next times, I would be more concerned about *efficiency*, rather than the UI: - fast download and install - does not break when a resource is not available - well thought and efficient UI. That's only my personal view. Maurice -----Message d'origine----- De : Erik de Bruin [mailto:e...@ixsoftware.nl] Envoyé : jeudi 12 décembre 2013 10:08 À : dev@flex.apache.org Objet : Re: Installer Revisited The FlexJS SDK build is a little more involved than a 'regular' Flex SDK build, from an Installer point of view. Instead of adding yet another monolithic code path to the Installer, Alex's idea boils down to building a 'can handle all builds' installer by using existing ant build files. A big +1 on the keeping of the nice UI, it is one of the reasons the current Installer is such a big success. I'd even go so far as to -1 a new Installer release that didn't offer the same (or better!) user experience. EdB On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 9:52 AM, Justin Mclean <jus...@classsoftware.com> wrote: > Hi, > > A few questions: > The installer can also run locally ie not download anything but copy local > files. Can we do this with ant for air? > With ant for air how would be be able to select the AIR and FP version and > only download the correct version? Can we default to current latest versions? > Would all the licence acceptances be in one step? Can we disable the next > button until all required licences have been accepted? > Can we keep the same nice UI the installer has? Just about all UIs I've seen > that use config files for layout/steps end up looking like they been designed > by developers not designers. > > I'm sure none of this is unsolvable, but should we throw away the nice > installer we have and replaces it with something else when it works quite > well? Wouldn't the time be better spent elsewhere eg fixing outstanding > bugs/JIRA issues? The users don't care if the installer uses ant for air > under the hood or not but they do care about bugs being fixed. Currently > modifying the AS code in the installer isn't that hard. > > Thanks, > Justin -- Ix Multimedia Software Jan Luykenstraat 27 3521 VB Utrecht T. 06-51952295 I. www.ixsoftware.nl
