If something like this were widely used in Windows, the "package" system used by many linux distros wouldn't be so incomprehensible to the typical user. And, when people find out how much more free (libre) software there is on the Linux side, there would actually be a reason to switch.
That's one of the end goals (the other being "stop Windows F/OSS from sucking").
And, as mentioned, there's the security issue. Packages would have to be validated in some way. I don't think that trusting the maintainers would work so well like it does for Debian.
I'm not yet sure on this, but then again, I'm not at a point in the design process where I have to worry about this too much.;)
Mind you, I'm not going to go demand that a program in the WPM repositories excise all external libraries. This is much less important on Windows than on Linux, as programs can more easily just use their own internal libraries. In many ways this is simply a way to develop a prettied-up, far cleaner program-fetching and install process that doesn't spew shit all over the Registry.
wpkg is one of the inspirations I had for this project, but I find it to be lacking in some respects. I hate to say it, but it seems too much like dpkg, and doesn't really fit itself all that well into the Windows space.
Your points are good, but even Microsoft suggests that developers put that dreck in a folder in X:\Documents and Settings\Username\Application Data or \Local Settings.
(i) recode applications to make them trivial - ie all the applications files self contained in a single folder (OS X style). User preferences obviously should be separated.
"Application Data" is a marvelous folder, ain't it? ("Local Settings" as well...)
(ii) create a registry redirector that redirects certain registry calls into files (Altiris SVS style)
I considered this, but I don't think it'll work.
I wish I could just hook every Win32 registry call, but the nasty part is that I'd hook them for every running application. Not optimal. Most programs that we end up packaging are probably going to be based on the flash-drive-portable ones, at least at first. Eventually I (or whoever else wants to, really) will probably start hacking away at popular programs that insist on shitting into the registry.
I worried about this when I was prepping my Google SoC application. You have a point. A different install process could be bad.
However, the way I'm looking at doing this--I can't see it being so terrible. It moves the focus of application installation away from what the program is to what the program does. Programs are de-commoditized. You pick the one you want, it installs itself, and if you don't like it, you just click "Uninstall" and it leaves no traces of itself behind. "Add/Remove Programs" does neither; a program can have an uninstaller that in fact does nothing and it will still be "uninstalled."
I'm also looking into a way to hook installs into Add/Remove Programs; since I'll have a command-line tool for the manipulation of packages (else I personally would probably go out of my mind), its "uninstaller" would be "winpack remove seamonkey" or the like.
One of the things I'm looking at is adding considerably more metadata than what you get with a Synaptic package. I almost have to, to make it look less hideous. I'm considering a user-commenting system (perhaps with user moderation--no idea how this will work yet) and the ability to submit helpful links for various packages.
I agree. I love Linux, and boot into it far more often than I do Windows. However--despite VMware, despite WINE--if I'm going to run a Windows program, I just go boot into Windows. Far fewer hassles than trying to deal with running it in a way it's not meant to run. (The exception for me is MUSHclient, which runs beautifully in WINE.)
This is something I'm personally very concerned about. The early program specifications are pretty clear about registry entries.
I just need to find a way to handle it in a sane manner. The best way I can think of is to have a tiny C library that just updates a list and then passes it to the Win32 API, but perhaps there's a better way.
1) I use Kubuntu myself. I still avoid Adept like the frigging plague. Get Synaptic; I don't care that it requires the GTK libraries, it's just better.
2) When walking someone through it, that's one thing. But what about when they want to do it themselves? Giving them instructions in a way they can't easily handle and do themselves the next time is not a good plan.
Hmm. I don't know about that. Part of the appeal of chain mail was that it spread impact damage out over a larger area. Maybe a lattice behind the bullet-resistant material?
The WELL? I'm a college student who was six years old at the time of Project Sunfire and even I know what the WELL is. Altavista was better than Google is now, during Altavista's heyday. Hotmail was also around about seven years before Gmail and popularized things considerably more important than an amount of storage nobody would ever use up. (Things like--you know--webmail itself.
Why hasn't Slashdot banned the twelve-year-olds from commenting yet? Shouldn't Slashdot have a fucking COPPA mechanism?
In their defense, Vista/iPod problems are Apple's fault. There had been Vista betas for developers for months and Apple neglected to fix the incompatibilities with their software.
I'm no fan of the Microsloth, but must we stoop to bullshit?
I heard the "use GIMP instead of Photoshop" line in high school. The teacher in charge insisted on using the GIMP because he thought it was better. He was an idiot.
The GIMP is a hideous piece of software (especially on Windows, where the virtual-desktop metaphor is not established and so you have a very angry taskbar full of GIMP windows) with a vertical learning curve and severe feature deficiencies. I use Linux on my desktop and FreeBSD on my server, but I refuse to be blinded by the zealotry espoused by the Grand Holy Free Software bunch.
Slashdot Mirror
If something like this were widely used in Windows, the "package" system used by many linux distros wouldn't be so incomprehensible to the typical user. And, when people find out how much more free (libre) software there is on the Linux side, there would actually be a reason to switch.
;)
That's one of the end goals (the other being "stop Windows F/OSS from sucking").
And, as mentioned, there's the security issue. Packages would have to be validated in some way. I don't think that trusting the maintainers would work so well like it does for Debian.
I'm not yet sure on this, but then again, I'm not at a point in the design process where I have to worry about this too much.
-Ed
Mind you, I'm not going to go demand that a program in the WPM repositories excise all external libraries. This is much less important on Windows than on Linux, as programs can more easily just use their own internal libraries. In many ways this is simply a way to develop a prettied-up, far cleaner program-fetching and install process that doesn't spew shit all over the Registry.
The packaging mechanism is a method of delivery that doesn't munge the registry and facilitates easy installation and removal.
:)
Just a clarification.
-Ed
It'd be nice if the installer could ask you where you want it installed, or even just tell you where its files are going.
Joe User won't care, but you'll easily be able to find it.
X:\path\to\WPM\packagename
wpkg is one of the inspirations I had for this project, but I find it to be lacking in some respects. I hate to say it, but it seems too much like dpkg, and doesn't really fit itself all that well into the Windows space.
It's a brilliant first go at it, though.
de facto standards-setting ability of Microsoft
Your points are good, but even Microsoft suggests that developers put that dreck in a folder in X:\Documents and Settings\Username\Application Data or \Local Settings.
(i) recode applications to make them trivial - ie all the applications files self contained in a single folder (OS X style). User preferences obviously should be separated.
"Application Data" is a marvelous folder, ain't it? ("Local Settings" as well...)
(ii) create a registry redirector that redirects certain registry calls into files (Altiris SVS style)
I considered this, but I don't think it'll work.
I wish I could just hook every Win32 registry call, but the nasty part is that I'd hook them for every running application. Not optimal. Most programs that we end up packaging are probably going to be based on the flash-drive-portable ones, at least at first. Eventually I (or whoever else wants to, really) will probably start hacking away at popular programs that insist on shitting into the registry.
I worried about this when I was prepping my Google SoC application. You have a point. A different install process could be bad.
However, the way I'm looking at doing this--I can't see it being so terrible. It moves the focus of application installation away from what the program is to what the program does. Programs are de-commoditized. You pick the one you want, it installs itself, and if you don't like it, you just click "Uninstall" and it leaves no traces of itself behind. "Add/Remove Programs" does neither; a program can have an uninstaller that in fact does nothing and it will still be "uninstalled."
I'm also looking into a way to hook installs into Add/Remove Programs; since I'll have a command-line tool for the manipulation of packages (else I personally would probably go out of my mind), its "uninstaller" would be "winpack remove seamonkey" or the like.
One of the things I'm looking at is adding considerably more metadata than what you get with a Synaptic package. I almost have to, to make it look less hideous. I'm considering a user-commenting system (perhaps with user moderation--no idea how this will work yet) and the ability to submit helpful links for various packages.
I agree. I love Linux, and boot into it far more often than I do Windows. However--despite VMware, despite WINE--if I'm going to run a Windows program, I just go boot into Windows. Far fewer hassles than trying to deal with running it in a way it's not meant to run. (The exception for me is MUSHclient, which runs beautifully in WINE.)
This is something I'm personally very concerned about. The early program specifications are pretty clear about registry entries.
I just need to find a way to handle it in a sane manner. The best way I can think of is to have a tiny C library that just updates a list and then passes it to the Win32 API, but perhaps there's a better way.
-Ed
It was cheaper to build all that than to pay the Devil's consultancy fees.
1) I use Kubuntu myself. I still avoid Adept like the frigging plague. Get Synaptic; I don't care that it requires the GTK libraries, it's just better.
2) When walking someone through it, that's one thing. But what about when they want to do it themselves? Giving them instructions in a way they can't easily handle and do themselves the next time is not a good plan.
I'll say it very simply.
Do not force end-users to the command line.
"Dear user: Insert the CD. Type make all; make install. Press return and go for coffee."
It should be
"Dear user: Insert the CD. Click 'Install'. Click 'OK' and go for coffee."
See the difference from a user's point of view?
Of those three, Stallman is the only one that cares about anyone but himself.
Every time rms opens his mouth, he hurts the Free/Open Source Software (I don't care if he doesn't like the term) movement.
Mark Shuttleworth, please.
Hmm. I don't know about that. Part of the appeal of chain mail was that it spread impact damage out over a larger area. Maybe a lattice behind the bullet-resistant material?
Good point. Then we need a database for tenants. :) RateYourTenants.Com, anyone?
Nonpayment? Damage? Unruly behavior that infringes on others in the building/neighborhood?
It should be extremely easy to toss a problem tenant. Then we don't have problem tenants anymore.
It's my country. *I have a right to change it.* "Love it or leave it" is just more facist crap. Stop trying to strip me of my constitutional rights.
He didn't say you had to leave. But he's got just as much right to fight your wrongheaded bullshit as you have to spew it.
GNOME, sure, but KDE? Granted, I'm lazy and haven't done any research, but what's gone KDE's way while Novell pumps GNOME?
You're an idiot. 'password', the eight-character segment that actually counts, is extremely common.
The WELL? I'm a college student who was six years old at the time of Project Sunfire and even I know what the WELL is. Altavista was better than Google is now, during Altavista's heyday. Hotmail was also around about seven years before Gmail and popularized things considerably more important than an amount of storage nobody would ever use up. (Things like--you know--webmail itself.
Why hasn't Slashdot banned the twelve-year-olds from commenting yet? Shouldn't Slashdot have a fucking COPPA mechanism?
In their defense, Vista/iPod problems are Apple's fault. There had been Vista betas for developers for months and Apple neglected to fix the incompatibilities with their software.
I'm no fan of the Microsloth, but must we stoop to bullshit?
I heard the "use GIMP instead of Photoshop" line in high school. The teacher in charge insisted on using the GIMP because he thought it was better. He was an idiot.
The GIMP is a hideous piece of software (especially on Windows, where the virtual-desktop metaphor is not established and so you have a very angry taskbar full of GIMP windows) with a vertical learning curve and severe feature deficiencies. I use Linux on my desktop and FreeBSD on my server, but I refuse to be blinded by the zealotry espoused by the Grand Holy Free Software bunch.