>The long term plan is to build an MSI based installer, because that leaves MSI is an absolute actual disaster to maintain and when it implodes you have to whip out the registry editors and system clenaers to erase any vestigal traces of metadata it uses to be able to even correct a package.
Even Microsoft has gone away from using MSI for software distribution that isn't part of Windows itself. Incidentally Inno Setup seems to be their choice. On Wed, Jul 24, 2019 at 5:41 AM Simon Richter <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi, > > On Wed, Jul 24, 2019 at 02:04:15AM -0700, Andrew Lutsenko wrote: > > > I agree, if my proposal won't be accepted as is then whatever changes I > > will make should be properly tested and won't be rushed for 5.1.3. But if > > no changes will be required then all the hard work is done already. Just > > need to merge the PR, run the build and upload both executables. > > I'm largely in favour, because I don't see myself getting around to > replacing the entire installer with something sensible soon. > > The long term plan is to build an MSI based installer, because that leaves > the option of either embedding the cabinet files into the MSI or leaving > them external, and allows building binary patch installers that can upgrade > existing installations in-place. > > Simon > > _______________________________________________ > Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers > Post to : [email protected] > Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers > More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp > -- Mark
_______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers Post to : [email protected] Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
