Hrm... most of my experience with setups involved working with Microsoft Installer, which isn't really an EXE so much as an MSI file (although it was still double-click install).
Even there, I don't know of a lot of free tools for it that are easy to work with.
I'd go with the pirated version myself.
yeah... i resorted to doing that for now... Setup Factory is the easiest option out there, but for an _actual_ license is like $380USD... so i found a cracked version and scanned it...
I always thought Advanced Installer was pretty easy to use.
Oh, heh... I didn't realize they had a freeware version. I doubt it makes .exes, though.
So I realized one of the benifits of this major version upgrade every 3 weeks thing is that all your plugins will always be out of date.
Chrome is at major version 13, clearly they have to keep incrementing until they've passed Chrome.
I don't understand this rapid release model. I used to wait but from what I understand once the new number is out, the old number is no longer supported.
the rapid release thing is to keep up with chrome.
The funny thing is everybody's working harder, but nobody's making any more money.
Version numbers have become a joke pretty much across the board anyway. No one knew why Sun chose to go from Solaris 2.6 to Solaris 7, instead of just calling it 2.7, for example. Then there's the whole Microsoft "the year is the version number" thing.
It used to be the whole x.yz or x.y.z thing, where incrementing X meant a major new release, incrementing Y was a minor new release, and Z was maintenance.
But ever since marketing people started getting involved in version numbers, it's been an area completely dominated by douchebaggery (like everything touched by marketing).
Since we are early in the century, perhaps the model Ubuntu uses, where the version number is x.y, and where x = (year % 100) and y = (month), makes the most sense. Projects which expect to release maintenance versions more than once per month could do x.y.z for that.
Microsoft "the year is the version number" thing.
I bet that will change soon enough when some ms marketing guru realized they have to release lots of new version numbers becuse google is.
Since we are early in the century, perhaps the model Ubuntu uses,
where the version number is x.y, and where x = (year % 100) and y =
(month), makes the most sense. Projects which expect to release
I dunno, that sounds just as dumb as any of the other schemes. If they're not going to release a version of software with the next integer number, they they should tag it with the build number. That way you know exactly what you're getting, and you should be able to go into the source repository and build an exact duplicate of your binary based onthe build number.
Actually you said "tag" which seems to make more sense; any time a build is distributed to the outside world you just bump the build number and create a tag.
Back when we were running Subversion the commit numbers were sequential integers, and at one point I proposed using those as the version numbers. No one else on the team liked the idea.
Back when we were running Subversion the commit numbers were
sequential integers, and at one point I proposed using those as the
version numbers. No one else on the team liked the idea.
That's a good idea, and as yet another show of how fucking stupid subversion is, they HAVE that state-of-the-universe revision number which would ideally be used to associate with a named tag, which would work perfectly, but do they do that? No......... a tag, is a copy of a section of the tree. What The Fuck Is Wrong With Those People.
Fri Aug 19 2011 17:02:35 EDT from Ford II @ UncensoredMicrosoft "the year is the version number" thing.
If I remember correctly Windows 95 was suppose to be Windows 94 but they couldn't get all the bugs out so they delayed the release a year.
We will simply release Citadel 3000 and blow them all out of the market!!!1111
work perfectly, but do they do that? No......... a tag, is a copy of a
section of the tree. What The Fuck Is Wrong With Those People.
You already answered that question a long time ago. Their goal was to rewrite CVS. And they did, along with all of CVS's suckage.
Version number inflation has been proven to produce superior bug-free code.
Ask any Microsoft developer and they'll tell you all about it :)