-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 16
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Please provide Releases and Packages in addition to MS App #9
Comments
I have wanted to publish packages, but since they need to be signed it is quite the process. When submitting to the store the packages are auto signed. Do you have any experience in signing MSIX packages? |
Winget lets you install anything that's in the store pretty much already:
|
@hawkerm winget is NOT a package manager. It is a CLI helper for MSI installers.
winget is simply an imitation of a package manager, but absolutely not one, unfortunately. |
winget meets this definition of a package manager. @adamency What definition are you using? |
An example: https://scvs.owasp.org/scvs/v4-package-management/ in particular:
The first two points are the main issue:
being brought by the fact that the packages are built from source by package management maintainers and their content transparently accessible from the package manager. Both these points are implemented by ALL major well known package managers, i.e. Winget relying on classic windows installers which can execute any arbitrary code they want AND does not give any information about which files are gonna be added to the system, where they are gonna be added, or any other system config (daemon/services, certificates, etc...), it is simply impossible to guarantee these criterias. Btw, I am a frequent contributor to Wikipedia, and I can tell you from first-hand experience how it is not a good source for specifications and technical definitions. But anyway, the discussion is veering towards a sterile debate, I would find it sad if this issue died based on an irrelevant technicality instead of honestly trying to listen to my point, which after much self-reflection still seem valid & objective concern to me (while I can agree that I was maybe a bit too unequivocal in my previous message) |
An open source project should use open source packaging systems in order to be trusted. Furthermore actual package managers are far more flexible and manageable for the end-user than store apps. Your program is great but it should really be installable with a simple
scoop install thejoefiniconmaker
. This would greatly help long term use, reinstallation, rollback, automation, etc...@TheJoeFin Can you please consider providing build artifacts directly here in the Releases page of your project and upload your package to the open-source Windows package manager scoop ?
Thanks in advance
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: