I believe we don't know if the failure rate is lower with 2.7. It could simply be the same, especially if folks are getting as far as antlr, gcc, or some other third-party download before it fails. That's the funny part, for all of these failures, we are not getting as many complaints as I would expect. I also plan to revisit the logic that dispatches the failure URL to make sure we aren't sending false negatives.
So, IMO, the best option is to try to make Installer 3.1 report failures with more information about what failed. Another suggestion is to retry if we get stream errors, or even try hosting the config.xml files in other places or on a CDN. I am also hoping to get 4.12.2 and FlexJS 0.0.2 out soon. We could add checksums to the third-party downloads in those install scripts but I think we've seen Adobe upgrade the downloads on occasion and then we'd get unnecessary failures until we found out. Maybe there is some job we could run to watch for changes. Thoughts? -Alex On 5/19/14 10:59 PM, "OmPrakash Muppirala" <bigosma...@gmail.com> wrote: >Should we perhaps revert back to the earlier version of the Installer >while >we investigate this? Or are you sure that debugging and fixing FlexJS >installs would take care if the 4.12.1 SDK installation as well. > >Thanks, >Om >On May 19, 2014 9:06 PM, "Alex Harui" <aha...@adobe.com> wrote: > >> At least two folks are currently struggling to get FlexJS installed >> properly. >> >> In the next installer we should try to provide more info on where it >> failed. If you have time to work on that, please do, otherwise I will >>get >> around to it. >> >> -Alex >> >> On 5/19/14 12:25 AM, "Christofer Dutz" <christofer.d...@c-ware.de> >>wrote: >> >> >I think the problems I was having were related to the Website >>contianing >> >the BlazeDS libs being insanely slow (Using the browser the page took >>up >> >to 10 Minutes to show). >> >This problem should have an effect on any installation. Also have I >> >noticed this poor performance beeng the regular mode of operation of >>that >> >server. >> >We could avoid this problem by releasing Apache BlazeDS and switching >>to >> >that. The Apache Servers should be able to handle the load. >> >Same with some of the libs. I have noticed the Ant scripts download a >>lot >> >of libs from project-servers. These tend to go offline now and then. I >> >would suggest to download these from Maven Central instead, as this >>will >> >probably even be online after the world explodes ;-) >> > >> >Chris >> > >> > >> >________________________________________ >> >Von: omup...@gmail.com <omup...@gmail.com> im Auftrag von OmPrakash >> >Muppirala <bigosma...@gmail.com> >> >Gesendet: Montag, 19. Mai 2014 09:18 >> >An: dev@flex.apache.org >> >Betreff: Installer failure rate is way to high >> > >> >Here is the break down for the last 30 days: >> > >> > /track-installer.html?label=Apache Flex SDK >> >4.12.1&version=4.12.1&os=windows >> >1,458 >> >/track-installer.html?version=4.12.0&os=windows >> >1,105 >> >*/track-installer.html?failure=true&label=Apache Flex SDK >> >4.12.1&version=4.12.1&os=windows* >> >821 >> >/track-installer.html?label=Apache Flex SDK >>4.12.1&version=4.12.1&os=mac >> >505 >> >/track-installer.html?version=4.12.0&os=mac >> >375 >> >/track-installer.html?version=4.12.1&os=windows >> >363 >> >*/track-installer.html?failure=true&label=Apache FlexJS >> >0.0.1&version=0.0.1&os=windows* >> >350 >> >/track-installer.html?label=Apache FlexJS >>0.0.1&version=0.0.1&os=windows >> >190 >> >/track-installer.html?label=Apache Flex SDK >> >4.12.0&version=4.12.0&os=windows >> >98 >> >/track-installer.html?version=4.12.1&os=mac >> >92 >> >Any ideas how to address this situation? Should we push a new release >> >with >> >more tracking (perhaps the install log)? >> > >> >Thanks, >> >Om >> >>
