Description of problem: We have several branding issues in 6.2.0 installer (mostly wrong product name changed for 6.2.0 see https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=971187#c0) Full product name: "Red Hat JBoss Enterprise Application Platform" Approved abbreviated form: "JBoss EAP" Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): EAP 6.2.0.ER4 Making a simple grep of CustomLangpack.xml_eng I can find following issues: --- Wrong full product name: <str id="JBossJDBCDriverSetupPanel.info" txt="JBoss Enterprise Application Platform 6 supports a number ... <str id="JBossDatasourceConfigPanel.info" txt="Configure the datasource for JBoss Enterprise Application Platform 6 below."/> <str id="MavenRepoCheckPanel.info" txt="... used to build JBoss Enterprise Application Platform 6. This configuration ... <str id="JDKCheckPanel.intro" txt="... all of JBoss Enterprise Application Platform 6's features."/> <str id="SummaryPanel.info" txt="JBoss Enterprise Application Platform 6 is now ready ... <str id="config.server.text" txt="...configuring the JBoss Enterprise Application Platform now ... <str id="ldap.text" txt="JBoss Enterprise Application Platform 6 can be configured ... <str id="jdbc.driver.install.info" txt="<html>JBoss Enterprise Application Platform 6 supports ... <str id="quickstarts.install.text" txt="JBoss Enterprise Application Platform 6 comes with... <str id="port.setup.desc" txt="... bindings for JBoss Enterprise Application Platform 6."/> <str id="configure-log-level.choice.text" txt="... levels for JBoss Enterprise Application Platform 6?"/> --- Wrong abbreviated form: <str id="JDKCheckPanel.notools" txt="...features of EAP 6 are unavailable. Continue anyway?"/> <str id="PathInputPanel.required" txt="EAP requires an EAP distribution. Please indicate its location."/> <str id="PathInputPanel.required.forModificationInstallation" txt="EAP requires an EAP distribution. Please indicate its location."/> <str id="${platform.edition}-core.description" txt="EAP plaform core." /> <str id="${platform.edition}-native" txt="EAP Natives" />
More issues: --- Screens Title Actual: Red Hat JBoss EAP Expected: We should use one of: Full product name: "Red Hat JBoss Enterprise Application Platform" Approved abbreviated form: "JBoss EAP" --- License agreement screen Actual: END USER LICENSE AGREEMENT JBOSS® ENTERPRISE MIDDLEWARE We are really not sure which version is correct (customer portal uses option b)). @jdoyle can you please provide info which version should be used: a) END USER LICENSE AGREEMENT RED HAT® JBOSS® ENTERPRISE MIDDLEWARE b) END USER LICENSE AGREEMENT RED HAT® JBOSS® MIDDLEWARE Thanks.
Edited strings in eng.xml to conform to guidelines above: http://git.app.eng.bos.redhat.com/jbossas-installer.git/commit/?h=eap-6.2&id=2b3780aaf63f07e6eef04a8e0b9609f921ef7b0b Edited properties to display correct brand: http://git.app.eng.bos.redhat.com/jbossas-installer.git/commit/?h=eap-6.2&id=b1f1a655d4955ddfe58109ec2f7b00ca1fe18cad Will modify License Agreement Screen once we confirm what it should display.
EULA on http://www.redhat.com/licenses/jboss_eula.html uses JBOSS® ENTERPRISE MIDDLEWARE™, question is, whether it is up to date with 6.2 changes. John, can you please decide which version should be used: a) use EULA from http://www.redhat.com/licenses/jboss_eula.html - JBOSS® ENTERPRISE MIDDLEWARE™ b) update EULA - END USER LICENSE AGREEMENT RED HAT® JBOSS® ENTERPRISE MIDDLEWARE c) update EULA with version from customer portal (https://access.redhat.com/site/pages/474793) - END USER LICENSE AGREEMENT RED HAT® JBOSS® MIDDLEWARE Thanks.
I'm not sue what I'm being asked. If the question is what text we should have in the installer, we should use: END USER LICENSE AGREEMENT RED HAT® JBOSS® MIDDLEWARE If the question is what EULA we link to, I don't find a EULA on the customer portal, only the one at http://www.redhat.com/licenses/jboss_eula.html
ALright I guess we can go on with EULA from http://www.redhat.com/licenses/jboss_eula.html and change all occurrences of JBOSS® ENTERPRISE MIDDLEWARE™ there to RED HAT® JBOSS® MIDDLEWARE. One more thing I noticed on ER5 is that we use both forms (full and abbreviated) on Pack selection screen. There is full form "Red Hat JBoss Enterprise Application Platform" for EAP packs and abbreviated form "JBoss EAP Natives" for natives packs. I would unify this to use just one of them.
I have updated the natives pack string to be consistent with the core packs string as per the suggestion in comment 5. Doing a diff on the EULAs from the Installer and the link in comment 4 above shows only differences in dates and in the wording of point 5. So rather then manually changing the installer EULA, I think it's best to keep it consistent with the online EULA linked above. If anyone provides a new, updated version, then I can download that for the installer at a later time.
Created attachment 813264 [details] Different brand forms on Pack selection screen
Created attachment 813266 [details] Natives string overlaps with progress
I've created BZ1020240 only for EULA so we don't forget to update it once it'll be ready. A few remaining issues: - wrong abbreviated form <str id="JBossJDBCDriverInfo.info" txt="... for major databases in the EAP documentation ..." /> <str id="jdbc.driver.install.choice.text" txt="... JBoss JBoss EAP ..." /> <str id="jboss-shell.standalone.description" txt="... JBoss JBoss EAP ..." /> <str id="jboss-batch.standalone.description" txt="... JBoss JBoss EAP ..." /> Pack screen still uses both brand forms (see attachment 813264 [details]), new sting is on Progress screen which now overlaps with installation progress (see attachment 813266 [details]). Would it be possible in IZ-pack not to display any progress once there is nothing to install ([0/0])? This way we could leave natives string here as it is.
Fixes for the branding string inconsistencies noted above: http://git.app.eng.bos.redhat.com/jbossas-installer.git/commit/?h=eap-6.2&id=9ff930825dc0bb8d357e2f8d95a2905179cd726f
Just an update, as this BZ Is considered a beta blocker and actually consists of two separate issues: 1) Branding Strings: Strings containing references to the product name in the english strings pack have been updated to their correct forms (either long or short) as specified in the original BZ description above. 2) EULA: We can not manually edit the EULA, so we must wait until this BZ is resolved: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1017162 Once that's done, we can use the updated EULA for the Installer.
BZ1020240 is just for Installer's EULA, so we can cover only 1) by this one (comment 11).
Verified on EAP 6.2.0.ER7 installer.