PowerShell Core Installer/Utility Module #97
Conversation
joeyaiello
requested review from
JamesWTruher,
Krishna-Vutukuri,
SteveL-MSFT,
a user,
HemantMahawar and
mirichmo
joeyaiello
changed the title
| Comments Due: 7/15/2017 | ||
| --- | ||
|
|
||
| # PowerShellCore Installer/Utility Module |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Meant it as PowerShellCore, but I think we'll probably have to go with PowerShellCoreProvider.
|
|
||
| ## Motivation | ||
|
|
||
| Installation and configuration of PowerShell Core on Windows is tricky due to the wide range of Windows versions that we support (7-10 and Server 2008R2-2016) and because of the usage of some "system" concepts shared by Windows PowerShell like the WinRM remoting plugin. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Better to call out: Windows 7 through Windows 10
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Not sure why you have double quotes around "system", and concepts should be components
|
|
||
| ## Goals | ||
|
|
||
| * I can install PowerShell Core across all supported versions of Windows and Windows PowerShell *at scale*. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Should you call out update explicitly?
|
|
||
| Right now, I think it's perfectly okay to ship all of these with nothing but common parameters. | ||
| Based on feedback to this RFC, we should prioritize a set of parameters that might be useful. | ||
| (For example, we may eventually add a `-Source` to `Install/Upgrade-PowerShellCore` that points to `GitHub` and some other, more official, source.) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
-PreRelease or something like that to denote ok to install beta releases
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Cmdlet should validate the cert on the msi package
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I like -Channel [Stable | Beta], how's that?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
How about -Release [Stable | PreRelease]
| While it's curently unclear *where* we should publish these MSIs to best enable these servicing patterns, | ||
| delivering an out-of-band application via an MSI is better than other alternatives for notifying administrators and user of security fixes and critical updates. | ||
|
|
||
| ### Tracking "Portable" Copies of PowerShell |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I prefer the terms xcopy deploy instead of portable
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The term "Portable" seems fine to me. It's widely used and well-understood, in my experience.
|
As discussed, this needs to be reworked as a PackageManagement provider. Not sure all that that entails, but I'll have an updated RFC coming. |
| Ship a module on Gallery called `PowerShellCore` which contains the following cmdlets: | ||
|
|
||
| * Install-PowerShellCore | ||
| * Download and install the latest PowerShell Core MSI and install it using the MSI PackageManagement provider |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Download and install a specific version of PowerShell Core, not just the latest?
Install-PowerShellCore -Version 6.0.0-beta2| While it's curently unclear *where* we should publish these MSIs to best enable these servicing patterns, | ||
| delivering an out-of-band application via an MSI is better than other alternatives for notifying administrators and user of security fixes and critical updates. | ||
|
|
||
| ### Tracking "Portable" Copies of PowerShell |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The term "Portable" seems fine to me. It's widely used and well-understood, in my experience.
| handle symlinking of the "primary" PowerShell to a specific version. | ||
|
|
||
| However, until PowerShell Core has moved to a new version (e.g. 7.x or 6.1), | ||
| this feature isn't necessary and is therefore out of scope for this RFC. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It is already actual - we install multiple betas.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
You can always have side-by-side betas (or any version really) by unzipping and putting into a different folder, however, non-developers are unlikely to do this and any installer is targeting the mainstream.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yes, we do this manually but why not use the new module? :-)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Because some people do servicing of MSI-based applications with tools like SCCM as opposed to using DSC or using PowerShell with scheduled tasks.
joeyaiello
force-pushed
the
InstallerModule
branch
from
41b704f to
2adef83
Compare
|
We'd still like to solve this problem, but I don't think a PackageManagement provider is the correct solution today. We'll continue investigating the right approach here as we go into our next release. |
joeyaiello
force-pushed
the
InstallerModule
branch
from
2adef83 to
2f34609
Compare
The RFC should explain everything, but this is a helper module that we should ship on the Gallery to aid admins/users with installing/updating/servicing PowerShell Core, as well as to register its remoting endpoint, from Windows PowerShell.
This change is