izpack 3.8

[tiewknvc9]

Does anyone know where I might be able to find the free izpack
installer version 3.8?

Thanks!

Its totally free, and if the author ever sees this,,,, THANKS BUD!
This thing kicks ass, but 3.9, has a bug that makes it not work for my
purposes....

 

[Andrew Thompson]

Does anyone know where I might be able to find the free izpack
installer version 3.8? ....
Its totally free, and if the author ever sees this,,,, THANKS BUD! ....
This thing kicks ass, but 3.9, has a bug that makes it not work for my
purposes....

All these matters might better be sorted by consulting/posting
to the izPack mailing lists..
<http://www.izforge.com/izpack/mailing_lists>

But given the history and progress of this installation,
I am inclined to add..

Initially you indicated you wanted this finished within 'a week'.
I guessed that was not going to happen if rolling your
own solution, and events (and the passage of time)
have borne that out.

However, I will rashly state.. Using ant to build a
JWS based launch, will give you a mostly working
solution - within 1 week of starting - and you will
still complete that quicker than trying to work out
the last details* of the current approach.

* 'The devil is in the details'
};-) [ <-- horned demon - winking ]

Andrew T.

 

[Simon Brooke]

All these matters might better be sorted by consulting/posting
to the izPack mailing lists..
<http://www.izforge.com/izpack/mailing_lists>

But given the history and progress of this installation,
I am inclined to add..

Initially you indicated you wanted this finished within 'a week'.
I guessed that was not going to happen if rolling your
own solution, and events (and the passage of time)
have borne that out.

However, I will rashly state.. Using ant to build a
JWS based launch, will give you a mostly working
solution - within 1 week of starting - and you will
still complete that quicker than trying to work out
the last details* of the current approach.

OK, having played with IZPack a bit, I now use antinstaller for all my
install scripts. Would you still say JWS is better, and if so is JWS
suitable for deploying server-side components or (as I had thought) just
client side components?

 

[Andrew Thompson]

OK, having played with IZPack a bit, I now use antinstaller for all my
install scripts. Would you still say JWS is better,

OK, having never used either izPack nor antinstaller, I
am unable to comment whether JWS is 'better' - not that
I am even sure what your definition of 'better'* is.

My point was not about which installation technology is
best, but merely that web start can cover all of what I
(currently believe) to be the requirements for this
applicaiton's successful installation (it has spread
across a few threads, as the OP attacked each
challenge in turn).

However, one point that JWS will always have in its favor
is that it is supported by the manufaturer of the language
that it is primarily aimed at installing. ;-)

* Faster? Sleeker, prettier? Smaller download?
Fewer 'clicks' from go to installed? Better for the
end user experience, or the development cycle,
...or the maintenance cycle**?

Each installer that I have seen has its nice points
that (I feel) should be replicated in an 'ideal installer' -
but none is 'perfect', nor includes all the features it
'should' (at least, not for the $0 that I am prepared
to pay for an installer!).

** For which web start offers the wonderful ability to
auto-update - no more bug reports from users
running version 0.01-beta!

...and if so is JWS
suitable for deploying server-side components

No - but specific to this thread, the OP's application has
no server side installation requirements - all client side.

Andrew T.

 

[tiewknvc9]

Yeah well, I ran into some problems.

But I still believe that it is more professional to release an
installer with an exe to windows machines.

Also JWS depends on the server being able to read the jnlp file. Which
I just dont trust will always be the case. Plus its asking the user to
use something that they would consider a new technology should they
ever actually look at the files that they are working with.

JWS is interesting, which is why I wanted to go that way in the
beginning, but the security certificate thing was going to be a pain in
the ass to keep up to date (having to renew it yearly and anything
decent would cost $$$)

Does anyone know where I might be able to find the free izpack
installer version 3.8? ...
Its totally free, and if the author ever sees this,,,, > ...
This thing kicks ass, but 3.9, has a bug that makes it not work for my
purposes....

All these matters might better be sorted by consulting/posting
to the izPack mailing lists..
<http://www.izforge.com/izpack/mailing_lists>

But given the history and progress of this installation,
I am inclined to add..

Initially you indicated you wanted this finished within 'a week'.
I guessed that was not going to happen if rolling your
own solution, and events (and the passage of time)
have borne that out.

However, I will rashly state.. Using ant to build a
JWS based launch, will give you a mostly working
solution - within 1 week of starting - and you will
still complete that quicker than trying to work out
the last details* of the current approach.

* 'The devil is in the details'
};-) [ <-- horned demon - winking ]

Andrew T.

 

[Andrew Thompson]

tiewknvc9 wrote:

Please refrain from top-posting - it makes threads very confusing.

Yeah well, I ran into some problems.

(chuckle) did you note how careful I was *not*
to claim that a JSW deployment would be totally
*without* hitches?

Just about any deployment option has its glitches.

[ ..not that it is relevant to this thread any longer, but
I still maintain it could be done *quicker* using a self-signed
certificate (which you have ruled out as unsuitable?). ]

...the security certificate thing was going to be a pain in
the ass to keep up to date (having to renew it yearly and anything
decent would cost $$$)

OK - so I can take that to mean that you are not
willing* to use a 'self-signed' or 'free-mail' certificate?
(It seems that is what you are saying, but I sometimes
have trouble understanding exactly what is meant)

* Hey, I don't blame you. I use a self-signed cert., and
have been admonished on any number of occasions that
such certs. are only suitable for 'testing and toy projects'.

Andrew T.