Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Windscribe 2 #103769

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Apr 13, 2021
Merged

Windscribe 2 #103769

merged 3 commits into from
Apr 13, 2021

Conversation

jivanpal
Copy link
Contributor

@jivanpal jivanpal commented Apr 13, 2021

Important: Do not tick a checkbox if you haven’t performed its action. Honesty is indispensable for a smooth review process.

After making all changes to a cask, verify:

Additionally, if adding a new cask: N/A, but...

  • Named the cask according to the token reference.
  • Checked the cask was not already refused.
  • Checked the cask is submitted to the correct repo.
  • brew audit --new-cask {{cask_file}} worked successfully. (didn't check this)
  • brew install --cask {{cask_file}} worked successfully.
  • brew uninstall --cask {{cask_file}} worked successfully.

Windscribe v2 uses an installer app (as opposed to v1, which just used drag-and-drop). If there is any way to automate installation rather than requiring the user to open the file from Caskroom due to installer manual, that would be good to know. However, I have not been able to discover any command-line arguments taken by the installer program that may make this possible.

Should v1 be added to homebrew-cask-versions? It is still available on Windscribe.com as "Legacy version".

Also, brew style --fix seems to have messed with the indentation of my uninstall launchctl block (see second commit). Should this "fix" be reverted?

@vitorgalvao
Copy link
Member

If there is any way to automate installation rather than requiring the user to open the file from Caskroom due to installer manual, that would be good to know.

Check inside the installer app. Often they are thin wrappers for a .pkg, likely in the Resources or MacOS directories. They may also have a zip or similar with an app inside. The more corporate an app is, the likelier they’ll have a bullshit installer.

Should v1 be added to homebrew-cask-versions?

No. If anyone needs it, they can submit it then.

@jivanpal
Copy link
Contributor Author

Check inside the installer app. Often they are thin wrappers for a .pkg

Alas, not the case here, the .app appears to just be a wrapper for an executable which is a one-click GUI installer, and it apparently takes no command line arguments. Does Homebrew support/condone launching the installer .app so that the user doesn't have to open it from Caskroom themselves (e.g. by using open within a do block)?

@vitorgalvao
Copy link
Member

vitorgalvao commented Apr 13, 2021

Does Homebrew support/condone launching the installer .app so that the user doesn't have to open it from Caskroom themselves (e.g. by using open within a do block)?

Not at present. If we did, we wouldn’t have installer manual:. See #24377 for future plans, but those are unlikely to happen any time soon unless we get a contribution.

Thank you for the submission.

@vitorgalvao vitorgalvao merged commit c4f2c94 into Homebrew:master Apr 13, 2021
@github-actions github-actions bot locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators May 14, 2021
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants