1

If a product simply requires a replacement of the .EXE file, what would be the expected way to deliver this update to multiple workstations in a large enterprise?

Is an .MSP file preferred?

Or should a new .MSI file be provided and it simply be treated like a new version of the product?

CJ7
  • 653
  • 10
  • 24

1 Answers1

3

Depends a LOT on how big the software is.

It if is small enough just make an update MSI.

If the package is HUGE, then an msp may be better.

simply be treated like a new version of the product?

Read the documentation how versioning is supposed to work. THis COULD be a minor upgrade or not, depending on your policies. I would put it in as minor upgrade.

Rob Moir
  • 31,884
  • 6
  • 58
  • 89
TomTom
  • 51,649
  • 7
  • 54
  • 136
  • How would an enterprise expect a vendor to deliver this? An `.msp` file? Are they generally accustomed to this? – CJ7 May 20 '12 at 07:25
  • 2
    I can't speak to other "enterprises" but if you deliver packages to my one as something else other than a MSI, MSP or MST file then the IT dept. will swear about you and look around for an alternative vendor whose applications do the same but are packaged sensibly. As for which one to use, as TomTom says, it depends. My main requirement is that a supplier delivers things in a consistent manner, document what they're doing and make sure the documentation is accurate. – Rob Moir May 20 '12 at 08:25
  • Sadly - and I am sorry to say so, Dj - that wont work. I am an IT freelancer and as such I check a lot of forums, and the amount of "repackaging specialists" searched (entry position, obviously) is HUGH. So, this says a LOT of software is NOT delivered properly packaged and companies have to repackage that. I always found that idiotic (and gross neglect from the producers) but obviously that is the world we live in. Sadly. To the OP: Make a better job, deliver it as MSI, MSP or MST ;) And properly follow MS guidelines ;) – TomTom May 20 '12 at 10:42