If they were manually doing it the updated bundle would have been downloaded by
them and be in a location which they are aware of. Also because they downloaded
it they would be responsible for deleting it.
For the self-update functionality, the v1 bundle downloads the v2 bundle and
places it in a location that the user isn't aware of. For me this isn't much
of an issue because I don't embed anything into my bundles, but for others this
may be a cause for concern.
From: Neil Sleightholm [mailto:n...@x2systems.com]
Sent: Wednesday, November 13, 2013 2:12 AM
To: WiX toolset developer mailing list
Subject: Re: [WiX-devs] 3.9 and Self updating bundles
Is that any worse than manually installing an update and cancelling?
Responding to myself here but... All my tests are looking good, except for
the fact a user could accept an update and then cancel the updated bundle, in
which case the bundle would be cached in a per user context and not removed.
The hard part about this is if Bundle v1 waits for Bundle v2 to complete (so
it can clean up in case of cancel), then Bundle v2 uninstalling Bundle v1
wouldn't clean up because the Bundle would still be running. If we were to use
IPC, it would be a bit complex because I assume it would be at the time of
removing the v1 bundle inside of v2 bundle process which may be the elevated
one. So we would have to have elevated v2 -> user mode v2 -> user mode v1 to
signal an exit to be able to remove the v1.
Any thoughts, suggestions, or pointers for those whom have had a walk down
the C++ side of Burn?
From: Hoover, Jacob [mailto:jacob.hoo...@greenheck.com]
Sent: Tuesday, November 12, 2013 11:12 AM
To: WiX toolset developer mailing list
Subject: [WiX-devs] 3.9 and Self updating bundles
Since there is no triage today, I figured I'd poke around for comments. I'm
currently going through another evolution of the self-updating bundle concept.
I started it in the engine, extracted it to a BAF, moved it to WixStdBA and I
am finally putting it back in the engine where it feels like it belongs. It's
utilizing the Atom feed update method. I have questions for Bob to determine if
it would be accepted in 3.x.
I introduced a HWND parameter to the Detect method just like apply had. This
will allow the engine to prompt for credentials if they are needed.
I introduced an OnDetectUpdate callback so the BA can determine if the feed
item is an update or not.
Would either of these changes be considered breaking changes and therefore
forced to 4.x?
Thanks,
Jacob
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DreamFactory - Open Source REST & JSON Services for HTML5 & Native Apps
OAuth, Users, Roles, SQL, NoSQL, BLOB Storage and External API Access
Free app hosting. Or install the open source package on any LAMP server.
Sign up and see examples for AngularJS, jQuery, Sencha Touch and Native!
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=63469471&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
_______________________________________________
WiX-devs mailing list
WiX-devs@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wix-devs
