Re: New Software Distribution documentation?
Re: New Software Distribution documentation?
- Subject: Re: New Software Distribution documentation?
- From: Peter Bierman <email@hidden>
- Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2005 16:50:33 -0700
At 8:16 AM +0200 4/30/05, Stéphane Sudre wrote:
* It looks like that since Apple added some HD
movies to the QuickTime Trailers, they are also
trying to reduce the size of other parts of
their web site (or may the . key is broken on
someone's keyboard):
The documentation is lacking a bunch of '.' to end sentences.
Ex:
http://developer.apple.com/documentation/DeveloperTools/Conceptual/SoftwareDistribution/index.html
CFBundleIdentifier
requireddata type: stringdefault value:
noneexample: "com.mycompany.mygreatapplication"A
unique identifier string for the bundle. It
should be in the form of a Java-style package
name. For more information, see "Property List
Key Reference" in Runtime Configuration.
Thanks for the note, I'll pass it on.
* I don't understand when and why the
IFMajorVersion and IFMinorVersion keys are not
used anymore.
This is becoming a bit messy: In the 10.1
format, the Version field of the .info was just
there to take some real estate apparently. In
the 10.2 format on 10.2, it was still not used
AFAIK and the IFMajorVersion and IFMinorVersion
were introduced. Additionally, a package_version
file was stealthily introduced later. And now,
these flags are not used anymore as I suspect
this is the new version field which is to be
used. What was wrong with the IFMajorVersion and
IFMinorVersion keys?
Is there a version mechanism that is working from 10.0 to 10.4?
The version number situation is muddled indeed.
Suffice it to say that there's an important
package somewhere out there necessitating each
and every oddity. Each time we "finalize" a
versioning mechanism, someone abuses it in a way
that requires us to maintain the oddities.
* It's somehow funny to spend time adding a
warning to state that $2, $3 and $4 are not to
be trusted in InstallationCheck and one line
after to define $RECEIPT_PATH which is probably
not going to be part of InstallationCheck for
obvious reason.
Going forward, we expect most installer packages
to use distribution scripts, which simplifies
VolumeCheck and InstallationCheck significantly.
* "Fixed a number of bugs". Could it be possible to detail this a bit more.
Fixed exactly 2345 bugs? ;-)
Without documenting every single change, we've
tried to document the things developers will be
most affected by. Notable undocumented changes
include the substantial performance improvements
we've made, as well as trivial things like
spelling or aesthetic changes.
Why is there a link to the release note, in the
cell after this one and not in this one?
I'm not sure where you mean for this...
-pmb
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Installer-dev mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden