FYI I restarted this thread in xpinstall with regard to corporate application servers
The point I feel reasonably convinced about is that the 'package' is the logical application unit and that really all installtion and deinstallation of packages should be handled by xpinstall. The package mechanism (xpinstaller) provides a common solution for both local installation and potentially references to remote packages. What I am not entirely certain about is the need for cryptography when hosted on an application server. Assuming that the installation 'path' option allows packages to be installed on corporate file servers why not allow packages to be loaded from corporate web servers? > Remotely loaded chrome has not been implemented yet. Frankly, it makes > me very nervous and would require a lot of careful security review. It > would also require signing or some other sort of cryptographic verification. > -Mitch >
