The Portable Freeware Collection Forums

I'd love to have a working FreeFileSync that is both (1) launchable from other processes like our platform and (2) properly portable so all our cloud users can use it. Unfortunately, we had exceedingly bad luck with the last project we forked to ensure our users could continue using it easily when the developer went a bit crazy on us.

smaragdus wrote:This is FreeFileSync 7.9 which can be downloaded from FileHippo.

Cool, thanks.

smaragdus wrote:... there should be 2 separate How to extract entries- one for the PortableApps version and one for the native version.

I really just want to add a quick note to the entry, but feel free to go back in and update. I mainly want to get away from something that's breaking and I think someone who has issues with the official entry will be more annoyed than someone who follows a forum link where the process doesn't quite work right.

JohnTHaller wrote:I'd love to have a working FreeFileSync that is both (1) launchable from other processes like our platform and (2) properly portable so all our cloud users can use it. Unfortunately, we had exceedingly bad luck with the last project we forked to ensure our users could continue using it easily when the developer went a bit crazy on us.

From what I understand, forking is a dramatic step that should generally be considered a last resort ("...forks tend to be accompanied by a great deal of strife and acrimony between the successor groups" [source]). Additionally, open code is supposed to be about community so you can't just set aside the developer's feelings. Still, there's a big bone in my body that feels forking is very defensible, especially after the clear success of LibreOffice over OpenOffice. Furthermore, every Github page has a "fork" button at the top of the screen so I'm mystified when someone panics on this topic.

That said, I wasn't there and I don't know what you were dealing with. *shrug*

Steps to make FreeFileSync 7.9 portable:

1. Download the installer from the FileHippo mirror
2. Download the installer and extract to a temporary folder (requires the latest version of Innounp as described in the FAQ)
3. Copy the contents of {app} to a folder of your choice
4. Launch FreeFileSync.exe

Optionally, to save space, remove .WAV files and any unneeded languages from the \Languages folder.

webfork wrote:From what I understand, forking is a dramatic step that should generally be considered a last resort ("...forks tend to be accompanied by a great deal of strife and acrimony between the successor groups" [source]). Additionally, open code is supposed to be about community so you can't just set aside the developer's feelings. Still, there's a big bone in my body that feels forking is very defensible, especially after the clear success of LibreOffice over OpenOffice. Furthermore, every Github page has a "fork" button at the top of the screen so I'm mystified when someone panics on this topic.

That said, I wasn't there and I don't know what you were dealing with. *shrug*

We'd prefer to never do a fork and have submitted changes upstream where we can. This was a bit different. We ran into a situation where the dev that originally approached us asking us to package his open source app for use by our users decided he didn't want us packaging it anymore after it had been available for over 3 years. This was due to a bug that had already been corrected and his worries of ongoing support of our users. Our packaged version had over 100,000 users (possibly more than the zipped version at the time IIRC) and we didn't want to strand them and his version didn't have an updater that worked for portable users because it required admin rights. He didn't want to support our build and didn't want to build the PA.c Format package himself.

As a solution, I suggested a minor rename of our version within the UI so that users knew we were responsible for support but still crediting him with full copyright and still have all donation links going to his site from the app and the app's homepage on PortableApps.com. That way PA.c users could still automatically update via our platform with all their other apps, he wouldn't be burdened with additional support requests, and he'd still get all the donations. I posted a development test package with the relevant changes to our forums for testing by our team and dropped him an email so he could see what it would look like and how it would work if we decided to go with this approach as an actual release pushed out to users. He started making threats over email, spamming our forums and Facebook page about us stealing his app, putting up a huge banner on his site that we'd stolen his app, etc. Not quite the response I was expecting.

After speaking with the other devs we decided to just drop the app entirely. So our users weren't stuck, I wrote some custom code and pushed out a final update explaining the drop in support, adjusting the app's paths to adhere to the standard unzipped version, details for the user on manually updating, etc. While we were within our rights both legally and ethically to fork it, we decided it simply wasn't worth the hassle.

I see that the FreeFileSync entry has been changed to point to the PortableApps version, which I support completely.
However, I also see that the name is still "FreeFileSync". I feel that an entry pointing to the PortableApps version of FreeFileSync should be named "FreeFileSync Portable" to indicate that it's not pointing to the standard installation version. Everything else about the entry as it currently stands looks good to me.

3D1T0R wrote:I see that the FreeFileSync entry has been changed to point to the PortableApps version, which I support completely.
However, I also see that the name is still "FreeFileSync". I feel that an entry pointing to the PortableApps version of FreeFileSync should be named "FreeFileSync Portable" to indicate that it's not pointing to the standard installation version. Everything else about the entry as it currently stands looks good to me.

I've updated the entry to reflect the proper name.

Thanks.

The "consistency check" nuisance ("install.dat") persists in version 8.1, I have no hope the developer will abandon his malignant practices.

Yep smaragdus you're correct, the author noted how easily folk extracted his prog and therefore not paying. He needs the adware income and the install.bat trick working very well

@flotty

Yep smaragdus you're correct, the author noted how easily folk extracted his prog and therefore not paying. He needs the adware income and the install.bat trick working very well

You seem to be very well-informed, are you the developer of FreeFileSync (Zenju)?

Zenju seems (to me) to believe that what he's doing is perfectly acceptable to all reasonable people, and that anyone who has a problem with it is the one with a problem, so I doubt that Zenju would post here under a name other than Zenju (about FreeFileSync at least). As such, it seems more likely to me that flotty read this post (or possibly another like it), and took the sentence "This was done to leverage the importance of the FreeFileSync installer with it's single(!) and optional(!) OpenCandy advertisement, which is still the backbone of the project's financing." to mean that Zenju's motivation for locking the app via the installer was to force his users to use the installer, because it feeds him ad revenue.

3D1T0R wrote:Zenju seems (to me) to believe that what he's doing is perfectly acceptable to all reasonable people, and that anyone who has a problem with it is the one with a problem

I know it's already a pain in the ass to get people to submit solid bug reports. Now he's got to compound the fact that a good chunk of his users aren't even using the latest version (either the PA version or what he's posting here). Maybe he can't justify the additional annoyance via a thicker wallet. *shrug*

Is FreeFileSync open source?

This part is handled in the installer, which is not open source.

Is FreeFileSync portable?

As always, nothing is fixed in stone, but the current 8.0 design is to only allow installations via the official installer with some leeway for the portable version. To clarify this, it's still possible to install FreeFileSync portably on an USB stick, carry it to another computer and use it there, or move it locally from one location to another. But it won't be possible to simply copy the files from one PC to another without an installation.

Is FreeFileSync free?

This was done to leverage the importance of the FreeFileSync installer with it's single(!) and optional(!) OpenCandy advertisement, which is still the backbone of the project's financing.

For me all this means that FreeFileSync is neither truly open-source, nor portable, nor free. I think (and hope) that in the long run the so called integrity check will ruin the project frustrating and alienating more and more users. Obstructing the copying of FreeFileSync from one device to another is outrageous and unacceptable. Since developer's greed knows no boundaries I hope that someone would take the source code, fork the project and recompile it but if this happens it is very likely that then Zenju will make FreeFileSync closed source.

smaragdus wrote:Is FreeFileSync open source ... portable ... free?

Well put.

With last version 8.1 - portable option, install.dat is extracted and everything works fine