Hi Adib,
is this the version with my fixes from yesterday (i.e. current 0.92.x) or did you already change anything?
Regarding .msi vs .exe I tend to vote for keeping the NSIS (.exe) installer for several reasons:
That being said I'd support a solution where one packaging system
could create both, an .exe and an .msi installer since maintaining
two systems clearly isn't optimal. However I guess such a major
refactoring would be better targeted at Inkscape 0.93+ and it
might be better to stick to what we have for the 0.92 release.
Regards,
Eduard
Adib.Best regards,The .msi installer has advantages in deeper system integartion (distributable in MS domains) and save removal but currently lacks translation.There will be definatelly problems when both systems are installed "in parallel".They do not harmonize together, that means a .msi does not detect existing .exe installed Inkscape and vice versa.I would recommend not to publish the .exe installer for the 0.92 release.Hello All,I put in the gallery the current screenshots of the .msi installer.
https://inkscape.org/en/~theAdib/galleries/win32-installer-screenshots/
reason:The .exe installer is based on NSIS scripts whereas the .msi installer is based on native MS installer toolset.
I do not have download numbers of .msi vs .exe but I think we should prefer the .msi as nr 1.Could we come here to a consens not to publish .exe installer?
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________ Inkscape-devel mailing list Inkscape-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel