[cvsnt] Cvs remove does not work in builds 2221 and above...

[Gerhard Fiedler]

Bo Berglund wrote:

>>> Just out of curiosity (I use the MSI installer): What is the motivation
>>> behind maintaining your own installer?

>> Good question. Well, TBH I myself do it mostly for the fun but it was
>> born from the fact that back when the MSI installer was introduced
>> there was rather strong adversary to it on this list. 

> A couple of other reasons:
> 
> 1. CVSNT is OpernSource. InnoSetup is OpenSource. But the MSI installer
> is not.

I can see that.

> and to make it simple to actually version the setup source scripts.

I haven't done really complex installers, but I have and had both
InstallShield and Microsoft Installer setups versioned (with CVSNT :)
Doesn't look difficult... or am I missing something here? Are you talking
about the installer sources?

> This was done after some discussion and resulted in a fast and good
> installer engine being used.

Due to the low frequency of the event, I tend not to see speed as a
critical quality of an installer :)


> 3. Other OpenSource projects like WinCvs bundle CVSNT but will not
> convert to ClosedSource installers like the MSI one. So if you look at
> WinCvs you will find that it comes with CVSNT 2.0.51d because that is
> the latest official InnoSetup release there is...

I can understand this, but it seems the fact that two InnoSetup installers
exist for CVSNT doesn't help much here. So it's not really an argument for
making one, at least as it seems to me.


So the situation, as presented here, seems to be that there is one good
argument to make an InnoSetup installer (keep it open sourced). OTOH there
are two separate, published, well-known InnoSetup installers but none that
would be used by open source software that installs CVSNT. Which seems to
take a lot of air out of the open source argument, no?

Thanks for your thoughts,
Gerhard