On Monday 18 October 2010 14:30:48 Christian Funder Sommerlund wrote: > [From the minutes] > toad_ and nextgens bring up problems with the current windows installer, > and give a brief of its history. > > nextgens notes that the hardest part is to continuously maintain it, to > ensure that it keeps working. > > toad_ points out that he needs to purchase copies of Windows for testing > purposes. > > Various people discuss ways of implementing a windows installer, > including MSI/NSIS and even using a VM. > > infinity0 notes that this doesn't solve the problem of needing a regular > maintainer. > > p0s argues that the windows installer is an important component and > therefore by default falls to toad_ if no other suitable person can be > found. > > toad_ accepts this solution in the case where our current maintainer > Zero3 doesn't show up in time for the next release. > > sanity offers to provide windows licenses. > > [My comments] > I feel like I ought to comment on the above, being the one that made > (and kind-of maintains) the thing :). > > I'm not sure if it was mentioned at the meeting, but I'd like to point > out that the main issues throughout the years have been directly related > to > > A) The custom user we used (was removed some time ago) > B) The custom service we used (was removed in the latest alpha) > > (both of which I argued on getting rid of back when I originally built > our new windows installer, several years ago, but was overruled :() > > As we now know, neither of the above is easy to do properly across the > vast lanscape of Windows installations. A) isn't exactly good practice > on Windows anyway, but B) ought to be doable. B) will work on pretty > much any Windows machine out-of-the-box, but has showed to be impossibly > hard to make work reliably on certain existing setups. > > I agree with nextgens that one of the main issues is maintenance. The > first year or so after my initial version was easy enough for me to do > alone, given my situation back then, but since I've started on my CS > studies it has been increasingly difficult for me to find time for > maintaining it. Another person or two would help a lot. > > Regarding choice of installer (custom AHK vs. NSIS vs. MSI vs...), I > still believe that a custom installer is a huge bonus to usability. The > downside, however, is that it requires more maintenance compared to a > standardized wizard installer.
Can you coordinate with Juiceman to get an update script sorted out for the alpha? (If necessary in cmd script). Are there any other critical issues that must be solved before deploying the alpha? -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 197 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part. URL: <https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/devl/attachments/20101020/92d7ae25/attachment.pgp>
