Overview
Examples
Screenshots
Comparisons
Applications
Download
Documentation
Tutorials
Bazaar
Status & Roadmap
FAQ
Authors & License
Forums
Funding Ultimate++
Search on this site
Search in forums












SourceForge.net Logo
Home » Community » Coffee corner » UPP SW deployment
UPP SW deployment [message #16872] Fri, 18 July 2008 12:41 Go to next message
mr_ped is currently offline  mr_ped
Messages: 801
Registered: November 2005
Location: Czech Republic - Praha
Experienced Contributor

I was recently thinking about what in U++ works for me, and I figured out (among other things) I like the package manager a lot, because starting new project usually requires just that, to enter new name of package, some basic set up about build methods, and you can go straight to writing tests (and code), and you are already producing cross-platform solution (although you have to try to compile sources often at all platforms to avoid some minor syntax problems with different compilers).

This thought did trigger my common set of analytical questions in my head, like what is opposite to this, and from one point of view the opposite of starting project is deployment of finished application to customer.

So that's the story how I run into "How does U++ help with SW deployment now?" question. And "What would help you and can be nice fit for U++? And what is your idea about importance of SW deployment and tasks you do connected to it?"

My personal view is that U++ doesn't help at all, actually the tidiness of source tree with only upp+cpp+h files is amazing (some "init" started to appear lately, is it really needed? Can't this one be built temporarily just during compilation and put rather into "out" dir than in src?) and something I absolutely love, but it also means you have to hunt final .exe somewhere in "out" folder which can be sort of puzzling in case you build with different compilers+flags, so I think U++ right now is a bit hostile in this matter.

I have hard time to figure out what would fit into U++ (TheIDE probably is the main target) and help with this.
Only two things did cross my mind.
1) the "list" of all files needed for application execution (.exe, all .dll/.so files, eventually dependency explorer which can detect usage of all .dll files outside of U++ file tree, so you can check them all visually), probably generated during build process? Or after user request?
2) "export application" (or "deploy"?), which would take all necessary files from "out" directory and copy them into destined folder from user. The result should be something what you can pack and send somebody else, and he will be able to run the application. This together with custom deploy steps (which would add necessary external files to such file tree) sounds good to me.

What are your ideas? Do you think this has some potential and should be targeted in the future of U++? What would save you work and hassle, and what is your way to deploy final SW?

[Updated on: Fri, 18 July 2008 12:43]

Report message to a moderator

Re: UPP SW deployment [message #16877 is a reply to message #16872] Fri, 18 July 2008 22:25 Go to previous messageGo to next message
mirek is currently offline  mirek
Messages: 12105
Registered: November 2005
Ultimate Member
Ehm, maybe one thing makes deployment relatively easy, at least for me: There are virtually no other files that have to be deployed than .exe Smile

BTW, in my glorious municipal agenda project, I have now "minimal development roundtrip" about 10 minutes - from specification of new feature to deployment of updated application. Of course, some features take longer (e.g. adding a new type of report takes me usually 30 - 60 minutes, new type of search about 20 minutes etc..). Anyway, sometimes I develop and deploy new versions of 5 applications in 2 hours, including time spent with users to specify requests Smile

Anyway, secret weapon to this is SelfUpdate. Very simple but saves a lot of time.

Also, maybe you can you ".post" link steps to do something....

Mirek

[Updated on: Fri, 18 July 2008 22:25]

Report message to a moderator

Re: UPP SW deployment [message #16902 is a reply to message #16877] Sun, 20 July 2008 08:34 Go to previous messageGo to next message
cbpporter is currently offline  cbpporter
Messages: 1400
Registered: September 2007
Senior Contributor
What I would one day like to see is support in TheIDE for setup projects. Nothing to fancy, just a tool to manage destinations for files that are included with the binary include mechanism and some default layouts in a new project template.

It would be great if we could do the (little) coding necessary to customize a setup in C++, and not have to use redundant-script and WinAPI as in InstallShield. I never understood why my InstallShield setup is taking more time to "prepare setup" than it takes to actually install the data (I have relatively small packages to deploy).
Re: UPP SW deployment [message #16905 is a reply to message #16902] Sun, 20 July 2008 12:51 Go to previous messageGo to next message
mirek is currently offline  mirek
Messages: 12105
Registered: November 2005
Ultimate Member
cbpporter wrote on Sun, 20 July 2008 02:34

What I would one day like to see is support in TheIDE for setup projects. Nothing to fancy, just a tool to manage destinations for files that are included with the binary include mechanism and some default layouts in a new project template.

It would be great if we could do the (little) coding necessary to customize a setup in C++, and not have to use redundant-script and WinAPI as in InstallShield. I never understood why my InstallShield setup is taking more time to "prepare setup" than it takes to actually install the data (I have relatively small packages to deploy).


Well, IMO, the way how U++ install (in Win32) works now and how it is created (using U++ code to compile and zip everything) is quite OK.

I never understood what that InstallShield is good for....

Mirek
Re: UPP SW deployment [message #16908 is a reply to message #16905] Sun, 20 July 2008 14:24 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Mindtraveller is currently offline  Mindtraveller
Messages: 916
Registered: August 2007
Location: Russia, Moscow rgn.
Experienced Contributor

luzr wrote on Sun, 20 July 2008 14:51

I never understood what that InstallShield is good for....

Mirek

The only purpose I can think of is automatic placing files into users default directories and linking executable to Start/Programs menu entry. So you don`t need to think where to place your new program.
Re: UPP SW deployment [message #16909 is a reply to message #16908] Sun, 20 July 2008 14:57 Go to previous messageGo to next message
mirek is currently offline  mirek
Messages: 12105
Registered: November 2005
Ultimate Member
Mindtraveller wrote on Sun, 20 July 2008 08:24

luzr wrote on Sun, 20 July 2008 14:51

I never understood what that InstallShield is good for....

Mirek

The only purpose I can think of is automatic placing files into users default directories and linking executable to Start/Programs menu entry. So you don`t need to think where to place your new program.


Well, but that is about 10 lines of C++.... and if you have done it once, there is little problem to do it again...

Mirek
Re: UPP SW deployment [message #16912 is a reply to message #16909] Sun, 20 July 2008 16:16 Go to previous messageGo to next message
cbpporter is currently offline  cbpporter
Messages: 1400
Registered: September 2007
Senior Contributor
The problem is with bigger packages, often several hundreds of MBs. You won't get that far with manual coding if you want to do something more complex than moving all the files from a folder to the destination. InstallShield organizes files in groups, and groups in components, offers GUI for users to select those components, has support for encryption, language dependent files, registry keys, etc.

It has created a "standard" for installers and uninstallers, and comparing U++ installer to one of those installers (more like a comparison as to how it follows the standard, but also a little bit on the functionality side) is like comparing Notepad to Wordpad.

On the other hand, using InstallShield as a developer is a major pain, because you have to write a lot of code (or at least maintain the autogenerated code) in a VB like scripting language and you use WinAPI to create your interfaces (at least in the versions I used, which are a little bit dated).
Re: UPP SW deployment [message #16919 is a reply to message #16872] Mon, 21 July 2008 07:42 Go to previous messageGo to next message
TeCNoYoTTa is currently offline  TeCNoYoTTa
Messages: 138
Registered: July 2008
Location: Egypt
Experienced Member

yes ...... i think installer will be nice
Re: UPP SW deployment [message #16938 is a reply to message #16912] Mon, 21 July 2008 20:13 Go to previous message
dmcgeoch is currently offline  dmcgeoch
Messages: 52
Registered: November 2006
Location: New Jersey
Member
I have been using InstallShield for another project, It is basically a wrapper for the Microsoft MSI installer. It does give some greater freedom in checking for required features and some additional scripting. It does have a decent interface for creating the installation package, but we have had to create work-arounds for various limitations.

Dave
Previous Topic: notification email
Next Topic: About Linux distros and incompatibilty...
Goto Forum:
  


Current Time: Sun Nov 17 01:27:50 CET 2019

Total time taken to generate the page: 0.02252 seconds