On 11/23/2012 8:14 AM, Rory O'Farrell wrote:
On Fri, 23 Nov 2012 17:00:54 +0100
jan iversen <j...@apache.org> wrote:
Good idea, that was basically what I meant...however even microsoft, does
provide a slim setup, that then downloads the needed packages.
There is a disadvantage to that: such an installation has to have on-line
access at install time. There are still many users who do not have on-line
access 24/7 at broadband speeds; they may rely for installation on a download
on a public library machine or a friend's machine and transfer the file to the
target computer by USB key, so a complete package (whether compiled for natice
language or as outlined above) would be useful to them,
This point comes up over and over again. We need to serve both groups,
but the solution should not force either group into a degraded install
process.
We can have a 'slim setup' that then loads resources from the same
location/media it came from.
This approach works for those who need local media due to bandwidth
constraints (CD/USB Key/File system)
It also works efficiently for broadband loading the bootstrap ('slim
setup') over the network, and then collecting additional resources as
needed.
If it is built correctly, this type of install would also facilitate
1-click installs without requiring the duplication of bits which is a
growing problem as we again add languages. If the bootstrap setup is
loaded with a configuration file, it could be set to load specific
language packs, dictionaries, and additional extensions. (The additional
files would either be downloaded over the network from the same network
location, or bundled on the same media in the same folder for a CD/USB
type install)
Let's stop arguing over which of the two scenarios our install will
support correctly, and agree that we need to support both scenarios
correctly.
Andrew
<snip>
