Share via

Writing a setup package?

  • Article

...then why don't you go with the flow and name it SETUP.EXE just like everyone else?

Seriously, it seems as though every team on GDN firmly believes that their project is the first and only application that I will ever need to download.  Why invest 10 seconds renaming it to something meanful when that time could be spent doing something truly profound such as posting off-topic weblog rants? ;)

Added: Clemens, if your SETUP.EXE is inside an APPNAME.ZIP archive, it gets my personal stamp of naming approval, which is accepted almost everywhere American Express is. Almost.

Comments

  • Anonymous
    October 25, 2003
    Possibly a little harsh; you are getting it for free after all...and you do of course have the option of just saving it with a different name.
  • Anonymous
    October 25, 2003
    Fully agreed upon. Careless developers.

    And you can just rename the name in the settings once.

    But for this, you would have to care.
  • Anonymous
    October 25, 2003
    What is it you want me to do? My stuff is in a .zip and contains a .msi -- appropriately named.
  • Anonymous
    October 25, 2003
    The comment has been removed
  • Anonymous
    October 25, 2003
    I read somewhere in MSDN a few years ago that Windows watches for programs called Setup.exe or Install.exe and does soemthing special with the dlls that you install onto the system. I think that the section even recommended that all setups should be called Setup.exe or Install.exe. It does seem prudent to put your Setup.exe file in a well named zip file for download.
  • Anonymous
    October 25, 2003
    Naming a setup of an application 'Setup.exe' is IMHO stupid. Today we have .msi files. Distribute the .msi, like MyApp.msi. That's all there is to know. Doubleclick the msi file and the installer starts. No extra files necessary PLUS the installer package has the name of the app, so you can store more than 1 in 1 directory. :)