Re: pga3 website

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Andreas Pflug [mailto:pgadmin(at)pse-consulting(dot)de]
> Sent: 05 August 2003 22:09
> To: Dave Page
> Cc: jm(dot)poure(at)freesurf(dot)fr; pgadmin-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
> Subject: Re: [pgadmin-hackers] pga3 website
>
>
> Dave Page wrote:
>
> >
> >
> >I'm not after state of the art for the sake of it. The major
> reasons I
> >use MSI are:
> >
> >a) Easily scriptable for any msi file for automated installation
> >
> pgAdmin3 probably won't be distributed widely in a company,
> so I doubt
> pgAdmin3 will ever be distributed automatically.

I know of at least one case where pgAdmin II is used in this way though
I cannot go into details of that particular site. It also allows easy,
seamless installation as a post intall step of other installers.

> >b) Allows use/creation of merge modules for easy bundling of
> software -
> >something Jean-Michel is extremely keen on.
> >
> Bundle with what?

PostgreSQL, psqlODBC, Npgsql, WinMaster...

> So there's a monopolization for D.P. at the moment for compiling the
> releases...

Not really. You could get the Installer SDK from Microsoft (it's free),
or Wise, Installshield or anything else that supports MSI. Most will
open the MSI file directly, not requiring the Wise project file at all.

Besides which, so what if I make the builds? I've done it for the last 6
years anyway, and as Jean-Michel said quite recently, the installers I
build are of good quality.

I really don't see the problem here anyway. MSI has some advantages
which are useful to some, and we have a working installer already. Why
must we change?

Regards, Dave.