-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 10.3k
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
Provide OpenSSL binaries under GitHub Releases #20154
Comments
OMC: the project will investigate this. |
OMC: we're looking into the possibility of a binary Windows release. |
not sure about author, but I would prefer just a normal Zip file against any other option. I would like to be able to just extract and run the program, similar to Linux. I dont need an installer. until then I am using this: |
Make installer separate from archive. Would satisfy both: who likes to unpack, or installers. Build already contains installer. Publish binaries that other people contribute for various systems. Post here requests to contribute binaries for missing systems. Teach, and link how to configure. My tutorial: |
note that @BugOfBugs is a known spammer, please ignore |
we are planning an installer binary that will be buildable via the repository https://github.com/openssl/installer. Thats available now, and are considering distributing a binary installer artifact for 3.5 |
Do you mean ready to use archive, and installer? So there would be no need to compile. |
I asked about the possibility to provide binaries under GitHub Releases in #20114 and @t8m provided some clarification but since it is a separate topic I am creating this feature request.
I understand that there are many possible build configurations and that not all of them can be provided but providing for a few major platforms would be nice.
On the other hand, if I am not mistaken this project uses automated builds as part of CI. For this to be useful they probably have to build binaries and run tests for a few platforms if not all of them. If the build process already produces binaries then I see no harm in releasing those.
Provided binaries don't need to come with support and/or warranty — they could have a disclaimer (e.g. "use at your own risk"), and if someone needs different build configuration than a couple of major ones provided, they can still clone and build OpenSSL themselves.
I would really appreciate OpenSSL maintainers' thoughts on this subject.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: