Having a dedicated working group is a great idea, but there should be "The One" who will decide at the end what will be implemented.
>> Lots of suggestions have come up in several discussions; make deb and rpm >> packages, provide vms, write a core install bash script, don't advertise >> support for certain OSes, etc. > +1 to the idea of the Matterhorn packages! As much as packages are useful for quick installations, they are typically bound to the current OS environment (mostly libraries). This means somebody will have to maintain a lot of different packages because of different OSes we support *or* have complex pre-install and post-install scripts built into the packages. If we create these scripts, I don't see any particular value to put them in a package. Maintaining separate scripts is in my opinion easier and we can still create a single installation script, which would do everything. I already did something similar for MH 1.2 (sent to this list), which includes several scripts which adapt to the environment. Default MH 1.2 is installed and configured with a simple call to "install_all.sh". This then installs java, maven, subversion, felix, 3rd party tools, gets MH sources and compiles MH. A simple config file providing local configuration parameters could easily be added. The same could also be done for CA or other combinations. About support for certain OSes: maybe we should more clearly state that MH is tested & supported on OSx only. On all other or newer versions support will be added if there's enough interest. From the bug report that we receive we don't know how many people besides the reporter use the new (version of) OS. Regards, Matjaz _______________________________________________ Matterhorn mailing list [email protected] http://lists.opencastproject.org/mailman/listinfo/matterhorn To unsubscribe please email [email protected] _______________________________________________
