[izpack-devel] Proposed new changes

[Bartz, Klaus]

Hi Ryan,
sounds good...
Some comments context related.

Cheers

Klaus


>-----Original Message-----
>From: izpack-devel-bounces at lists.berlios.de
>[mailto:izpack-devel-bounces at lists.berlios.de]On Behalf Of Ryan
>Shillington
>Sent: Wednesday, August 02, 2006 6:58 PM
>To: izpack-devel at lists.berlios.de
>Subject: [izpack-devel] Proposed new changes
>
>
>Hello folks,
>
>I've made a number of changes that I would like to contribute back to
>IzPack.  I'm sending them to you to see if anybody has any 
>objections to
>them:
>* I've changed the TableModel for the PacksPanel so that the
>dependencies work both ways.  Assume that you have packs A and B, where
>A depends on B.  Currently if you click on A it won't allow 
>itself to be
>checked until B is checked.  I've changed it so that if you click on A
>then B will be checked automatically.  I would like to make this an
>option whether you want this functionality or the original
>functionality.  I'm proposing that this functionality be the default.

If possible, changes or extension should be compatible to the old 
behavior. That's what you will do, good.
I am not happy with the current behavior, but until jet it was tolerable
for me.
What about A and C depends on B? Means you need B if you would install
A and/or C. That's my situation. Do you have an Idee to handle it with 
your changed behavior?
An other point with which I am not so happy: The description area uses
an other font as the rest. Should be peanuts, but until jet a have had
no time for it. 

>  * I've created a much, much more complex, but also nicer InstallPanel
>that has pretty checkmarks and shows the status of the install on the
>left while files are being copied and the ant tasks are running.  Our
>install is really complicated - containing about 1.2 GB of software.
>We've integrated a number of third party applications to our 
>application
>that need to be configured individually.  I'd like to offer an
>"AdvancedInstallPanel" that handles some of these more complex
>scenarios.

Sounds like you support also custom actions as the "ExtendedInstallPanel"
(you ask about ant tasks). That will be a precondition for me to use it
in my installation.
If you read this mailing list, you know that I am just at changing 
layout of IzPanels. The "full area using" panels like the PacksPanel are
not affected, but the InstallPanel. I do it because the standard layouts
makes problems for me e.g. at a back step (sometimes the layout will be
changed). Additional I need panels where the anchor is NORTHWEST; the 
standared in IzPack is CENTER.
If your panel uses not allways the full panel area, it should also use 
the new layout. Unfortunately I am just during changing and there is also 
no docu in the moment. I hope I can checkin this week the first changed
panels which then can be used as example.

>  * I'd like to fix a number of IzPack bugs related to installing more
>than 2GB of software.  Currently IzPack uses integers to pass 
>around the
>size of modules/disk space where we need to use longs.  As I'm 
>sure most
>of you know, integerss can't be used to calculate spaces for more than
>2GB.  Fixing this will also allow you to see the real size of the disk
>space available.
>

Your calculation of space changes are checked in by Julien.

Are you capable to create and handle a jar file greater than 2 GB with
a standard 1.4.x VM? I never tested it, but I rember that there was 
a problem earlier...


>Any comments?  Suggestions?  Opposition?
>
>Ryan
>
>
>IMPORTANT NOTICE:
>This message may contain confidential information. If you have 
>received this e-mail in error, do not use, copy or distribute 
>it. Do not open any attachments. Delete it immediately from 
>your system and notify the sender promptly by e-mail that you 
>have done so. Thank you.
>
>_______________________________________________
>izpack-devel mailing list
>izpack-devel at lists.berlios.de
>http://bat.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/izpack-devel
>