[rurban: Re: setup.exe command line parameters]

[Dave Korn]

Brian Dessent wrote on 24 June 2008 15:55:

> But, alternatively, if we decide just to go with the release
> branch+verification backport I think we can bypass this and just go live
> now if you're confident enough about it.  But when the idea of slipping
> in more and more things comes up I start to feel uneasy and want to go
> back to having a public RC to prevent egg on our face.  Do you see the
> dilemma?  I'd really rather not rush a release with a bunch of changes,
> so can we just push out the verification change only and then work on
> stabilizing HEAD and doing a RC without the time pressure?

  A fair point, considering our resource limitations.  Ok then: my first
order of business will be getting the verification release out the door.
This needs me to do two things: update the various docs that describe
setup.exe, and figure out how to do the code-signing bit.  (Which probably
means us using a self-signed cert to get started with, and seeing if we can
get a proper cert later...  more on this when I've researched it a bit
further.)


    cheers,
      DaveK
-- 
Can't think of a witty .sigline today....