Thank you, and the others who responded, for your replies. It definitely
helps me understand the rationale for the choices CoApp is making.
Original Message
Subject: Re: [Coapp-developers] CoApp questions
From: Garrett Serack
To: John McNamee , coapp-developers
ds.
Also, I don't think Windows Installer is a particularly appealing
implementation of declarative install.
The question I was trying to ask is whether the pain of Windows Installer is
worth the benefit.
Original Message
Subject: Re: [Coapp-developers] CoApp questio
John,
I'm heading up mkPackage which creates the actual MSI files for CoApp
packages. I will be the first person to tell you MSI is a pain to deal with
and I can say much of it from first hand experience dealing with it. I
wouldn't want anyone to have to make MSI packages by hand which is the
reas
Howdy,
(1) Windows Installer / MSI
Does anybody outside of Microsoft really like MSI? Wouldn’t a package format
based on ZIP archives be a better cultural fit for open source software? I
know MSI is the supported method for installing SxS assemblies. For the sake
of discussion, let’s assume
An MSI file is basically a database containing tables with
relationships (reference:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/Aa372860), so that means
handling it is more complex than a ZIP. But since the installer (msiexe)
is part of the OS it seems like the most natural way to install softwar
On Sunday, September 26, 2010, 4:23:05, John McNamee wrote:
> Does anybody outside of Microsoft really *like* MSI?
I think the only ones that don't hate MSI (outside of Microsoft) are
sysadmins, since MSI allows fairly simple publishing of programs to
domain computers.
--
< Jernej Simončič ><><
On Sun, Sep 26, 2010 at 4:23 AM, John McNamee wrote:
> Does anybody outside of Microsoft really like MSI? Wouldn’t a package
> format based on ZIP archives be a better cultural fit for open source
> software? I know MSI is the supported method for installing SxS
> assemblies. For the sake of di
7 matches
Mail list logo
