Explore the possibility of an MSI package

[Azolo]

Stems from this discussion in the group.

Basically from a SysAdmin perspective, a package that is deploy-able and managed by Windows could be a boon.

@luislavena switched from an MSI to Inno with cdb5a15, which brings up valid problems.

I see the benefits of MSI as more of a package than an installer. However, I may be blinded by my problems of the past, so let us open up the conversation.

Additional Reading:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WiX
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_Installer

(Note: Wikipedia is pretty awesome)

[jonforums]

While there are multiple reasons I think we're better served with an MSI, the most compelling is simply that MSI's integrate nicely with Windows similar to .deb, .rpm, and pacman pkgs for Linux distros.

Let's spike this in a new branch and begin flushing out the issues. To help quickly stand up a simple initial version:

• use the WiX 3.6 release
• all WiX files use *nix-style LF endings with 2 space indents
• no PATH or file association support
• no extended GUI customizations
• no Japanese language support
• no MSI signing support
• no custom registry entries like I've done with the Inno installer
• no integration with rdoc-chm doc task
• two features for installation: base, and a selectable tcl/tk
• implement current menu shortcuts and icons

[alexhass]

I need the MSI installer for fully automated active directory deployment. Otherwise we cannot use RubyInstaller, but we need it for SASS compiling.

[Azolo]

@yamlfd There aren't any plans to offer a MSI installer at this time. =/

[alexhass]

What is holding this back? Nsis is death sh**.