tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9537945.post4122989972652570278..comments2023-08-20T04:16:39.520-05:00Comments on Deployment Engineering Archive: .NET Framework SizeChristopher Painterhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12167478740431444267noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9537945.post-92227393006927851012013-03-21T02:33:05.903-05:002013-03-21T02:33:05.903-05:00You can override with whatever the compression alg...You can override with whatever the compression algorithm you want can handle. such as InstallShield IIS/XML, WiX CA's should be refactored and adopted as standard action patterns Aidan Harrishttp://amoskramer.wordpress.com/2013/03/20/the-net-framework-is-designed-with-scalability-in-mind-to-make-it-very-efficient/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9537945.post-64999062725426951792007-12-21T11:32:00.000-06:002007-12-21T11:32:00.000-06:00I have stopped distributing the .NET Framework wit...I have stopped distributing the .NET Framework with my installations. There are too many issues that can arise, and technically the user should accept the license from MS before installing it on their system. I think that is why Rob has a fundamental issue with it. <BR/><BR/>I put the check in the installation and force the user to download and install it themselves if they don't have it.Aaron Shurtshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16538587727045104430noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9537945.post-6779257052677127912007-12-21T11:08:00.000-06:002007-12-21T11:08:00.000-06:00I see a lot of overlapped but yet separate pieces ...I see a lot of overlapped but yet separate pieces here, and they each lead to different questions and answers<BR/> 1) The full .NET 3.5 redist is huge<BR/> 2) Alternate compression technologies could mitigate that (but the EULA does not permit it)<BR/> 3) Windows Installer is stuck with a set of built-in deployment capabilities that offer a decreasing coverage of what setups must accomplish<BRAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9537945.post-48467065894865108612007-12-21T10:54:00.000-06:002007-12-21T10:54:00.000-06:00My thought is more on the topic of accomplishing y...My thought is more on the topic of accomplishing your first point, which is that the Windows Installer's priorities are not in any way in-line with what their users actually want to accomplish.<BR/><BR/>I hate to go all over the place, but posts about how CA's are evil and terrible are an admission of failure make me wonder (especially when written by Rob Mensching) if they're directed at the ShadowWolfhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17170306422408594103noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9537945.post-65493146914087436142007-12-21T08:47:00.000-06:002007-12-21T08:47:00.000-06:00I agree with many of your points. However, at the...I agree with many of your points. However, at the end of the day, what the Windows Installer team fails to do, tools vendors or setup developers must do on their own. I completely agree that all of the various vendor add-on's such as InstallShield IIS/XML, WiX CA's should be refactored and adopted as standard action patterns. However the MSI team has shown for years now that it's just not aChristopher Painterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12167478740431444267noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9537945.post-10348299774614045982007-12-21T08:31:00.000-06:002007-12-21T08:31:00.000-06:00Well, I just don't see "the point". Sure, saving ...Well, I just don't see "the point". Sure, saving a few MB on the .NET 3.0 framework's rediculous ~200MB size is a good thing, but is this really a best practice? Wouldn't Microsoft have done it if they thought it was?<BR/><BR/>Compression formats being cab compliant is one of the major things that Microsoft Windows Installer requires. Deployment tools are designed around your install using ShadowWolfhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17170306422408594103noreply@blogger.com