Re: RFC: Update wizard

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Andreas Pflug [mailto:pgadmin(at)pse-consulting(dot)de]
> Sent: 03 December 2004 12:18
> To: Dave Page
> Cc: pgadmin-hackers
> Subject: Re: [pgadmin-hackers] RFC: Update wizard
>
> Dave Page wrote:
> >>Not directly. The binaries would be corrupted. In the rare case of
> >>typo fixes without count change the count could be
> increased manually.
> >>It's a
> >> kind of version number anyway. We could use the date too.
> >
> >
> > Why would binaries be corrupted?
>
> CVS would change the file to insert the version, which would
> probably corrupt the binary structure.

No, it doesn't, unless it finds a placeholder such as $Id. Even then, I
don't think it does so for binary files.

> > In that case then, why distribute the languages seperately?
>
> I don't understand the question. We *do* distribute the
> languages packaged, no?

I think I was asking why we shouldn't include the languages in the
update zip file, but it was a few days ago now :-) Forget about it!

> >
> > As I also suggested though, there should be an option to turn off
> > auto-checking on the options dialogue. But I could live with non
> > flashing.
>
> Disabling autocheck and not updating immediately are different things.

The option controls the background checking for updates. If you then
double click the alert icon, a dialogue is presented allowing you to
select a mirror and download.

Speaking of which, we will need to have a list of mirrors on the main
webserver that can be downloaded... That is not a problem though.

> Every 60 days (e.g.) updates are checked, and a feedback is
> given to the user. After that, the user might decide to
> upgrade immediately, or do it later.
> Statusbar icon seems the best solution (but it will need some
> effort; tooltip and doubleclick on that icon must be supported)

Yeah.

Regards, Dave.