After all of these discussions, I've come up with the following list
of improvements that I think would make the Bootloader better.
1. Make it so that a you have a better chance at getting an instance
of OOo that has the capabilities your client requires. This can be
done by:
(a) send it a minimum version number required and have it search for
that version number
(b) if you're opposed to version numbers, be able to send it a
Service
name and it will look for an installation that supports that service
(although, this will be much more complicated)
2. Make the searching for OOo more robust so that it may fulfill item
1
(a) Unix/Linux
- I see that Unix/Linux uses the 'which' command. Since you're
already
using external system commands, you could also try the 'locate'
command (which I realize isn't always used, but is pretty common on a
non-server box).
- You could search common locations (such as the ones which your
rpm's
install in)
(b) Windows
- you could search all registry keys (regardless of HKEY_CURRENT_USER
or HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE) to find a version which will fulfill the
client's requirements
3. Give Bootstrap the optional capability to let the client app
choose
which installation among several to use
- This would allow a client, for example, to call a new method
Bootstrap.findInstallations, which would return a List of paths.
Then,
it would be possible for the client app to present these to the end
user, and have them select. After which, for example,
Bootstrap.bootstrap(installPath) could be called to use this
installation.
- I know this is possible by setting a jvm arg, but it would make it
much easier for the developer this way, and also for the end user
because a jvm restart would not be necessary.
mike
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Small Business - Try our new resources site!
http://smallbusiness.yahoo.com/resources/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
