Re: Linux Downloads page change

On Tue, Jul 10, 2012 at 03:39:54PM +0100, Dave Page wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 10, 2012 at 3:25 PM, Scott Mead <scottm(at)openscg(dot)com> wrote:
> >
> >
> > 1) A no-gui option
> > The bitrock installers do have this, but at times, the technology isn't
> > perfect. Many times, people want to just run a command and have it install.
> > The idea with an RPM of these binaries is that we get the benefit of the
> > same binaries across installers, AND lower the barrier to entry by making
> > rpm -ivh ... just work.
>
> No technology is perfect, but we have numerous users utilising text,
> silent and response file installations quite successfully, including
> all the additional post-copy steps the installers undertake. We also
> have an unpack mode which is much more like an RPM install in that it
> just lays down the binaries. Simply put, you can just run a command
> and have it install.

Agreed. If the non-GUI mode of the Bitrock installers is broken, please
report it and let's fix it. If it can't be fixed, maybe we need to use
another installer, but it is not clear what is broken. Are you saying
it is better for non-GUI installs because they don't need to supply a
flag for non-GUI mode? Shouldn't we just document the flag better?

The smaller download does make sense --- it is a leaner install.

I wonder if the OpenSCG text should more clearly state is doesn't
include any GUI componients.

--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com

+ It's impossible for everything to be true. +