Re: Installer: again

["Justin C. Sherrill" <justin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Matthew Dillon <dillon@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in
news:200402150219.i1F2JUeM076766@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx: 

>     There were several discussions.  I truely do not know what the
>     best approach is for an installer but the more I think about it
>     the more I think that Python is the way to go... that trying to
>     make it browser based will just result in an ugly, underperforming
>     installer. 

You mean ugly, code-wise, or ugly, cosmetically?  One advantage of
sticking to a browser based install is that it can be very easy on the
eyes, and so somewhat easier to perform.  

Of course, I'm making these suggestions knowing that I'm not the one
doing it.  :P