3 ms·

They aren't using GitHub correctly, so they have the installer for Windows in-tree. https://github.com/ubisoft/Chroma/blob/main/Release/Chroma_setup.exe https:

They aren't using GitHub correctly, so they have the installer for Windows in-tree. https://github.com/ubisoft/Chroma/blob/main/Release/Chroma_setup.exe https://github.com/ubisoft/Chroma/blob/main/Release/Chroma_s...

tgv 2y ago
This might be to placate the "where's the .exe?" crowd. A release and a hint where to find the .exe might have been more appropriate, but I doubt they will use this repo for development: there is no sign of branches, tags or other contributors.
- OneDeuxTriSeiGo 2y ago
  Or rather they probably just dumped the project to a fresh git repo since their internal tooling probably handles binblob diffing in VCS.
tester756 2y ago
You're too pedantic, there are valid reasons to do so
- perching_aix 2y ago
  What would be those? Serious question, not picking a fight.
  - KennyBlanken 2y ago
    Free bandwidth and boosting the engagement stats for their account among game developers, many of whom have github accounts.
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
  - onli 2y ago
    There is not really a big disadvantage, is there? It keeps the .exe around in all possible versions without additional effort, even if external build dependencies were to fall away etc. Sure, nothing proper releases can't mostly achieve as well. But also not something bad. It's a little bit like when projects include their dependencies instead of just listing them in a gemfile etc. Some hate that, but it can make things easier.
    - perching_aix 2y ago
      Size comes to mind, and of course the proverbial policy of not having any blobs in a source repository for security reasons.
  - adzm 2y ago
    I've done this when we had existing scripts that were run after cloning a specific git repo, that then needed an .exe for reasons, and just adding the exe to the repo was the easiest solution so we didn't have to change all the existing tooling and processes.
paxys 2y ago
They are using Git correctly.

tgv 2y ago

This might be to placate the "where's the .exe?" crowd. A release and a hint where to find the .exe might have been more appropriate, but I doubt they will use this repo for development: there is no sign of branches, tags or other contributors.

OneDeuxTriSeiGo 2y ago
Or rather they probably just dumped the project to a fresh git repo since their internal tooling probably handles binblob diffing in VCS.

tester756 2y ago

You're too pedantic, there are valid reasons to do so

perching_aix 2y ago
What would be those? Serious question, not picking a fight.
- KennyBlanken 2y ago
  Free bandwidth and boosting the engagement stats for their account among game developers, many of whom have github accounts.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- onli 2y ago
  There is not really a big disadvantage, is there? It keeps the .exe around in all possible versions without additional effort, even if external build dependencies were to fall away etc. Sure, nothing proper releases can't mostly achieve as well. But also not something bad. It's a little bit like when projects include their dependencies instead of just listing them in a gemfile etc. Some hate that, but it can make things easier.
  - perching_aix 2y ago
    Size comes to mind, and of course the proverbial policy of not having any blobs in a source repository for security reasons.
- adzm 2y ago
  I've done this when we had existing scripts that were run after cloning a specific git repo, that then needed an .exe for reasons, and just adding the exe to the repo was the easiest solution so we didn't have to change all the existing tooling and processes.

paxys 2y ago

They are using Git correctly.