powered by Jive Software

45 issues for 2.5.9 to fix - too many

I think some of the issues should be moved to next versions, so the could have a stable version more often (like we do with Openfire). So, Daniel and others, what do you think?

UP: any thoughts?

I’d just be happy to see the .pack files extracted on install. I’ve tried EMCO MSI Package Builder and Advanced Installer, neither are able to build an MSI that works for remote quiet installs. Advanced Installer’s MSI installs but Spark doesn’t run, guessing it’s a java issue. EMCO’s MSI doesn’t even install, and the EMCO support guy has no clue what’s causing it (I’ve built the MSI on 4 different computers now, all with the same result).

This one little issue makes me a sad panda

I’ve built an MSI using WinInstall LE that works OK. I did have a problem at first where Spark just would not run, but I discovered that on first run it needed to create a couple of files in its Program Files/Spark directory, which standard Users did not have rights to do. (Can’t remember the exact filenames now). I just granted the necessary access rights on that directory in Group Policy, and then it just worked.

Cheers,

Ben

I agree. Having an msi that actually works when deployed via Group Policy would be fantastic. The two biggest issues with this are the non-standard location of preferences (Documents and Settings\Username vs. Documents and Settings\Username\Application Data\Spark) and the unpacking of the files on first run vs. during the install.

Having a business-class chat solution means having it be deployable. Usually, if there’s a need for chat, there’s a need to do things like install software remotely.

What happened to:

1: SPARK-575

2 : SPARK-731

3: SPARK-706

They were on the 2.5.9 roadmap from the start. Daniel added them after a Wed chat we had. now they are gone from the roadmap right around the same time this thread started.

I noticed they all have this appended to them in the JIRA:

Change by Daniel Henninger\

  •           Fix Version/s*
    

2.5.9

[ 10760

]

Does that mean they are included to be fixed for that version, and if so, why have they disappeared from:

http://www.igniterealtime.org/issues/browse/SPARK?report=com.atlassian.jira.plug in.system.project:roadmap-panel

Sorry to rant about it, but I have been trying to get these addressed for around a year now, and just when it seems like the fix is really coming, it seems to be possibly pushed back yet again???

Scott

If you’re asking me, i havent changed (and i’m not able to do that) fix versions of these issues or roadmap. This hasnt changed right after i have posted this thread. It was still 45 issue for a long time. Though i have pointed this to Derek in some Wed chat and he didnt replied anything. So i’m not sure did he really read this thread or decided to strip roadmap on his own.

I understand that these issues are important to you. But maybe they are too complex to implement quickly (dont know what Derek has told you), so maybe Derek decided to concentrate on others first.

My thought was that roadmap should be shorter, so we can get more frequent updates. Fixing 45 issues for one version, could take same time as fixing it in 3 bunches and your issues can still be the last ones. Of course, there would be 3 QA, which will take a bit longer. On the other side there is a bigger chance to brake something when doing a lot of changes in one version.

chuckle Derek isn’t working on Spark anymore. That said, I moved a lot of the issues away from 2.5.9 in an attempt to get Spark in a position to be released sometime in the near future. Of course, it still falls pretty low on my priority list right now. I have gotten some nice patches from the community though, so anyone interested in working on patches, improvements, bug fixes, etc, please feel free and send me your changes! Looks like building the MSI installer via open source tools is not going to be a totally trivial endeavour, but I still would like to move to something we can use from the command line/automated build procedures. However, if 2.5.9 gets to a point where it’s ready for release and I don’t have the new procedure worked out, then I’ll just use advanced installer and build it the manual way.

Yeah. I ment Daniel, of course.