For what architecture? You use windows, what about Linux? What about MacOS? Should the author spend their time making an executable for each platform? Or only the platforms that are most popular? (Edit: also, I’m not going to touch the fact that for complex programs there are third party dependencies which have license restrictions to be bundled together into an exe or provided into a zip as a dll, which is extra work for the dev to do just to make an exe)
Secondly, as I pointed out in my above comment which you seemed to have missed:
Some code, as is literally the case for the original source does NOT run via a standalone executable, so there is NO exe to upload. It is run via third party interpreters, in this case the Python interpreter.
There’s a section about how to run the code in the original post for example here https://github.com/sherlock-project/sherlock?tab=readme-ov-file#usage - it requires the source code (because its not compiled, it’s interpreted) and installing python - which then is used via python3 sherlock to run the tool. Again, in cases like this there is literally no executable to upload. There may be some roundabout ways to upload an executable that packages, but that’s way beyond just providing the source to be run via python.
Also to edit to say this: Regardless of how “easy” you may think uploading an exe for something might be, calling the people developing that code “stupid smelly nerds” as the original poster did (not you) is completely disrespectful, arrogant and entitled, and if someone demanded that I upload an exe to one of my repos like that, I would completely ignore their request.
I mean, you’re partially right yeah - for bigger projects with more devs, they often DO provide windows/linux/etc executables, and that does save a ton of hours.
But for smaller projects with one main dev, it’s a lot to expect one person to make releases for all platforms. Maybe for the platform they develop for at best - though if that’s not your (not you personally, just general) favorite platform, you’d still be out of luck.
Again to repeat: it’s a moot point in the case of this context since there was NO EXECUTABLE to provide - it was a python script. So arguing this is completely unapplicable in this case! The original poster was just being an entitled jerk who didn’t bother reading anything and resorted to name-calling.
For what architecture? You use windows, what about Linux? What about MacOS? Should the author spend their time making an executable for each platform? Or only the platforms that are most popular? (Edit: also, I’m not going to touch the fact that for complex programs there are third party dependencies which have license restrictions to be bundled together into an exe or provided into a zip as a dll, which is extra work for the dev to do just to make an exe)
Secondly, as I pointed out in my above comment which you seemed to have missed:
Some code, as is literally the case for the original source does NOT run via a standalone executable, so there is NO exe to upload. It is run via third party interpreters, in this case the Python interpreter.
There’s a section about how to run the code in the original post for example here https://github.com/sherlock-project/sherlock?tab=readme-ov-file#usage - it requires the source code (because its not compiled, it’s interpreted) and installing python - which then is used via
python3 sherlockto run the tool. Again, in cases like this there is literally no executable to upload. There may be some roundabout ways to upload an executable that packages, but that’s way beyond just providing the source to be run via python.Also to edit to say this: Regardless of how “easy” you may think uploading an exe for something might be, calling the people developing that code “stupid smelly nerds” as the original poster did (not you) is completely disrespectful, arrogant and entitled, and if someone demanded that I upload an exe to one of my repos like that, I would completely ignore their request.
Dunno, just put an .exe, .snap and whatever thing MacOS uses. .img, I think?
About the first part - isn’t it that if developers don’t do it, literally everyone else has to?
Seems to me like devs saving an hour to give thousands of man-hours of headache on the side of end users.
I mean, you’re partially right yeah - for bigger projects with more devs, they often DO provide windows/linux/etc executables, and that does save a ton of hours.
But for smaller projects with one main dev, it’s a lot to expect one person to make releases for all platforms. Maybe for the platform they develop for at best - though if that’s not your (not you personally, just general) favorite platform, you’d still be out of luck.
Again to repeat: it’s a moot point in the case of this context since there was NO EXECUTABLE to provide - it was a python script. So arguing this is completely unapplicable in this case! The original poster was just being an entitled jerk who didn’t bother reading anything and resorted to name-calling.
Yeah I only refer to the practice in general, not that case for sure.