> (unless a complete working solution is presented in that other technology,
> and as long as that other technology still creates MSI files with free-as-in-beer tools).
Just out of interest, what's the reason for enforcing that the installer must be an MSI? Or, rather, if I were to present an alternative .exe installer that ticks all of the above boxes, exceeds the capabilities of the current installer and above all is easier to extend and maintain -- would that be a non-starter because it's not an MSI?
Trent.
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4