Install & Upgrade FreeFileSync via Chocolatey

[mailuser]

Hi,

Looking to install FreeFileSync via Chocolatey but found the last updated version to be v10.2.0.20180914 while the latest available on the website as on 30th May 2023 is v12.3 however as per the maintainer's comment it's no longer possible to do so without your intervention.

Could you please reconsider upgrading this on the Chocolatey Packages to help users like us manage installations & upgrades easily?

[xCSxXenon]

Auto-updating is part of the donation features, adding official to support to chocolatey would take away that value

[mailuser]

Auto-updating is part of the donation features, adding official to support to chocolatey would take away that value

Didn't understand this sentence, could you explain in more detail?

[xCSxXenon]

Currently giving the dev money adds auto-updating, Why would he add auto-updating ability for a service that he gets no money from?

[mailuser]

Noted but as far I understand, this application is usable as an open source software without a charge and the website thus has a donate URL specifically used to avail voluntary contributions.

Also the official download page already provides .exe files for Windows OS which when installed upgrade to newer versions by auto-removing the older one and asking for donations only when finished as shown in the image below



Therefore, any reason why this practice of auto-updates can not be continued similarly in the Chocolatey package itself? Would also request the software's principal maintainer Zenju to please comment here for definitively determining on this concern's feasibility.

[xCSxXenon]

Therefore, any reason why this practice of auto-updates can not be continued similarly in the Chocolatey package itself?

This is where you are mistaken, as it isn't auto-updating. You have to manually get to the website, download the new version, and click through the installation by hand.

[mailuser]

This is where you are mistaken, as it isn't auto-updating. You have to manually get to the website, download the new version, and click through the installation by hand.

Agreed but it's where you're mistaken too as installing manually downloaded versions does not ensure not guarantee fixed contribution to the dev as you implied previously, it is only when the button within installer or donate URL (on website) is clicked.

Currently giving the dev money adds auto-updating, Why would he add auto-updating ability for a service that he gets no money from?

If this were entirely 100% true, then updates to FreeFileSync would've been based on a subscription model which is not the case as of v12.3.

Could you kindly share any more cogent reason(s) on why auto-updates should not be made available via Chocolatey?

[xCSxXenon]

installing manually downloaded versions does not ensure not guarantee fixed contribution to the dev as you implied previously

What? I didn't imply that at all, I said "Auto-updating is part of the donation features, adding support to chocolatey would take away that value". You must not understand what 'auto-updating" means. Just because the installer removes the old version and installs the new version does not make it an auto-update. Auto-updating is when you click a single button that results in the upgrade. I would say that no interaction at all is a true auto-updater, but many people prefer to read a changelog before they are implemented.

There is only one reason:
Add auto-updates to Chocolatey -> less incentive to donate -> less $$$
Less money, more bad

It's simple, it's cogent.

[mailuser]

I understood what is auto-update way before you explained it however you contradicted yourself in your own sentences. Auto-updating does not mean "Auto-updating is when you click a single button that results in the upgrade" but rather a process that upgrades a software to the latest version periodically in the background without any user interaction.

Add auto-updates to Chocolatey -> less incentive to donate -> less $$$
Less money, more bad

In my opinion as people know the value of FreeFileSync, voluntary donations would still continue. Still don't get the correlation of how providing auto-update in Chocolatey is less incentive to donate, especially considering it was available in the package's history .

[Plerry]

Apart from the above discussion, which now seems to narrow down in semantics, there may be another obvious reason for the developer not to make updates available via Chocolatey:
It simply means extra work.
Zenju then needs to invest time and effort to pick up the detailed requirements of using Chocolatey, and then needs to invest time and effort to develop and maintain Chocolatey packages, next to the other releases. And that only for added convenience of a potentially small fraction of the FFS users (those that prefer to use Chocolatey), but, like all other users, have other options to update their FFS installation.

[mailuser]

The small number of FFS Users via Chocolatey is a valid point however do note it's teknowledgist, the Chocolatey package creator who'd need to put in time/effort only if Zenju permits to do so - more details in this comment

I had mentioned this when the thread started but seems previous responders missed it. Also Zenju's detailed knowhow of this project's possibilities/limitations is precisely why I solicited their opinion to clarify this request's feasibility.

[xCSxXenon]

I also said

I would say that no interaction at all is a true auto-updater

but you're either too dense to notice or it didn't fit your narrative
¯\_(ツ)_/¯

[mailuser]

You quoting your own sentence wouldn't make it factual because software that auto-updates async with no user interaction (or as you said, a true auto-updater) exists and runs on systems as well.

but either you don't fully comprehend it along with this query's impact or are too impatient to resolve this by being dismissive.

[mailuser]

Could anyone from this software's official maintainers please share a conclusive status of this discussion?

[Plerry]

I am not an 'official maintainer', just a regular contributor in this forum.
But from the above discussion, and from comparable discussions on deployment methods, I would not expect Zenju (the FFS author) intends to deploy his software via Chocolatey, or comparable methods/platforms, any time soon.

[mailuser]

Thanks for 'contributing' with your insights Plerry, helpful indeed. What I wanted to know was not if the maintainers or Zenju (the FFS author) had any plans to provide Chocolatey deployments but instead support the relevant developer who voluntarily does so and depends on them as described in this comment .

[Zenju]

There are no plans to support Chocolatey:
viewtopic.php?t=8142#p28290

[mailuser]

That's unfortunate, but thanks for your response, Zenju.

From it, I gather you're affected financially but I'm sure you're aware that a lot of people use FFS without contributing either. I also believe monetary gains are dependent more on the conviction of users to click on the donate URL on the FFS website irrespective of manual installers / automated ones like Chocolatey.

Github Issue #995 says the developer of the chocolatey package is willing to continue push updates with your support & guidance (the effort will be theirs) so hoping you reconsider once.