Ah, I knew that you'd asked for this, but I didn't realize that you had a strong conviction. I suppose I should've asked ;)
I'll leave it alone for now and focus on cleaning up a few things left. It would be great if a few others could try the installer and provide some feedback quickly. Feedback is welcome. Thanks. regards, Erik On Friday 27 January 2006 10:19, David Jencks wrote: > On Jan 27, 2006, at 5:54 AM, Erik Daughtrey wrote: > > Given the comments I've gotten, I'm going to change the installer > > and go back > > to the behavior where it does not allow the selection of both web > > container > > packs to install. I'm going to ditch the additional buttons which > > allow > > selected features to be inactive at runtime. > > > > We could put this up for a vote, but since there have been very few > > comments > > on this topic, I assume that most folks just want an installer that > > works > > well. > > I pretty much strongly prefer the way the installer works now, I > think I asked for it to be this way :-) > > I won't stand in anyones way though. > > My view is that the installer should present all the options > reasonably available. They are MUCH easier to configure in the > installer than in any other way, and I think that the additional > confusion while using the installer is minimal. > > thanks > david jencks >
