[Gnumed-devel] Re: previous postings to do with installers

[Jim Busser]

On Jun 17, 2004, at 1:22 AM, Dominique Buenzli wrote:

> > On Jun 17, 2004, at 12:09 AM, Jim Busser wrote:
> > maybe look at the link (at bottom) to an item on the gnumed-devel 
> > archive for alternative (or maybe complementary) approaches
> > http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/gnumed-devel/2004-02/msg00114.html

> Thanks for the link. I think too that it would be better to have 
> python scripts to install "the thing" as it is crossplateform but the 
> problem is that I have absolutely no knowledge in python.

> On the other hand I also very much like the idea of a gnumedlauncher 
> bundle containing wxpython and adds on because it very clean and 
> respecting the OS X way.

Yes, every Mac user loves Mac installers.

> The only thing that doesn't work in this Gnumed.dmg is this "prepare 
> database" script, maybe I will include my old horrible terminal script 
> with it (the one which opens a terminal window asking you to enter 4 
> yes and 4 passwords) so that you can still configure postgresql  in a 
> more easy way....

It is not so bad. It only scares people who have never before used 
Terminal. But it would be nice to be able to get rid of. Maybe it can 
still be reduced with Karsten's tips in his post of June 15 re Mac OS 
easy install.

I think there will be value in separate versions such "client only" 
which can then connect to hherb.com or anubis public accounts so that 
people can at least make sure that their clients work.

That would mean a separate "server installer", to install onto either 
the same machine (which people with only one machine will do), or on a 
separate machine (as will be done in actual practice). I am not sure 
whether to install in a separate step onto the same machine will create 
problems for example if python etc already exist on that machine.

To have a third installer 'client plus server" creates the work of 
maintaining an extra package (or meta-package of that is a more correct 
term) and I wonder if it is better for each platform to have just the 
two above, and not have this third one, plus of course updaters (unless 
updating is just built inside the installers).

Maybe all "installers" should contain the same checking code as 
"updaters" in case any user has previously installed components on 
their machine(s).