>Along which comes the new features like FlexJS, etc. That's exactly my point.
Installer 3.0 is more for FlexJS (and for internal maintenance purpose). It's not "really" needed to install Flex SDK. So if we don't want to get people confused, let's link Installer 3.0 to FlexJS PR, and mention that it can also be used to install Flex SDK (which is a good point for the end-users). WDYT? Maurice -----Message d'origine----- De : omup...@gmail.com [mailto:omup...@gmail.com] De la part de OmPrakash Muppirala Envoyé : samedi 8 mars 2014 10:46 À : dev@flex.apache.org Objet : RE: Should we release 4.12? If we don't announce it, people won't bother to come check it out. We do have an auto-update functionality built into Installer 2.7, but that would require then to start the app first. Whereas, if we pair it up with 4.12, folks who want the new sdk will automatically get the new Installer. Along which comes the new features like FlexJS, etc. If we release the Installer after 4.12, then we miss the chance of getting FlexJS into existing users machines. Thanks, Om On Mar 8, 2014 1:16 AM, "Maurice Amsellem" <maurice.amsel...@systar.com> wrote: > A few thoughts: > Why should we announce the installer at all? > Do other products announce release of their installers ? I don't think so. > > Whatever efforts and innovation there is in it, it's only a > convenience/commodity tool. > > What new functionality does Installer 3.0 bring over 2.7 , from an > end-user/developer standpoint? > For Flex-SDK: ( few UI improvements, localization, and ant install > for Linux, but available without the installer). > For Flex-SDK + Flex JS ... : same installer for all tools. > > This make me think we should "pair" the announcement of Installer 3.0 > with FlexJS, for which it makes the most sense. > > Maurice > > -----Message d'origine----- > De : Justin Mclean [mailto:jus...@classsoftware.com] Envoyé : samedi 8 > mars 2014 08:04 À : dev@flex.apache.org Objet : Should we release > 4.12? > > Hi, > > Given yet another RC for the installer. Do you still still we should > hold up announcing the 4.12 release? > > Vote +1/+0/-1 etc but vote is informal/not binding in any way. > > Thanks, > Justin >
