This is not a criticism as I know it is a lot of work to keep all the apps on portableapps up to date. And I thank the team for their work and effort.
However, I noticed that it seems like there are some apps (like firefox, chrome, etc...) are constantly being updated, like every few days in some situations. Yet, many apps are languishing on the outdated version list for many months at a time. There was a period last year where the new version available list was just massive, then I believe earlier this year it was completely cleared out (which I'm sure was a monumental effort). But it seems like we are back to the same situation where certain apps have been updated many times but others are just left to wait on the update list. I understand that there are probably more users of certain apps than others and that can take priority.
I guess my question is, has there ever been consideration to change the update priority to a chronologic system (first report of new version takes priority)? This would potentially alleviate some programs being left out of date for many months at the expense of say a web browser that gets what seems like weekly updates.
Thank you.
Visit the Community page
Join our forums
Subscribe to our email newsletter
Subscribe with RSS
Follow us on BlueSky
Follow us on Facebook
Follow us on LinkedIn
Follow us on Mastodon
Security is the foremost. That's why web browsers, email clients, etc are always updated as soon as possible. Any app with a major breaking bug affecting users would be next. Major breaking bug meaning something that impacts the usability of an app for the majority of users.
It's me solo updating everything except a few apps and I've been paying for the privilege most of this year with the project operating at a loss and building up credit card debt.
Sometimes, the impossible can become possible, if you're awesome!
What you say makes perfect sense. Security issues should be the number of priority, then major bugs, then everything else.
I'm sorry to hear that Portableapps is in the red. That's unfortunate as it is such a useful platform. I try to donate every year but I completely understand that most users probably don't. There is only so long you can operate at a loss and I would hate for this project to fail. Have you ever considered monetizing it? Maybe a $10 a year subscription model or higher one time license fee? Of course free is the most attractive to users but it's really not fair to you to spend all this time/money on maintaining software at a loss.
as john said we try to keep this order,tho i oversaw some,as dont understood a bug or had to little time for changelog
sad,so one version skiped
i thought the steps would help,like moving the downloads and changing server/hosting etc
hosting should lower dramatically,you had a change in planning
not sure whats of it,the post was not updated,i think
i hope it gets better
fingers crossed
i help were i can. maybe you can help me too. threads in account/track.
if you don't want to help don't post crap!