Well, if the installers were put to that use, it would be fine. But couldn't these be used to install whole hacks for you, without you editing a thing yourself?
Yes it could, but we tried that once, like vB hacker, its much better to let a real person do the template & file modifctions in the long run
A problem with automated installers is that they can barf horribly when being applied over an already-hacked system. For example, a hack I'm working on at the moment has this instruction:
That's great, unless a previous hack has been installed with its own permission specified for 1048576. At least with a human being reviewing changes as they are made, they can cater for this if they know what they're doing. I wouldn't be confident of writing something that could cope with this sort of thing automatically though.
A problem with automated installers is that they can barf horribly when being applied over an already-hacked system. For example, a hack I'm working on at the moment has this instruction... At least with a human being reviewing changes as they are made, they can cater for this if they know what they're doing. I wouldn't be confident of writing something that could cope with this sort of thing automatically though.
Ditto.
After re-reading this thread, I think what Zachery means by the mysterious "Blank Installer Project" is a standardized script that only offers automated installs of templates and phrases.
After re-reading this thread, I think what Zachery means by the mysterious "Blank Installer Project" is a standardized script that only offers automated installs of templates and phrases.
Templates, phrases, settings, any querys that need to be run.
Somthing that should help newer and even older users just coming up with an installer, if we have a more standized script where things can be "pluged" into it makes things so much simpler.