New Version of ExplorerPatcher

AndreTen said:

EP is already at version 40.9 Still a pre-release

Click to expand...

Can you explain to me (us) what's going on with the "pre-release" label on a dozen or so versions after the latest "latest" label, and then why pre-release resumes as you scroll back down through versions? @AndreTen

I noticed that @AndreTen I don't think there is anything major or worth worrying about. I just hope it doesn't get to advanced and loose the original focus

Each pre release build is when a feature is corrected, updated or added and a new build number is given after each one so it's easier to track each individual change

Wisewiz said:

Can you explain to me (us) what's going on with the "pre-release" label on a dozen or so versions after the latest "latest" label, and then why pre-release resumes as you scroll back down through versions? @AndreTen

Click to expand...

Oh, not so complicated. Those are "beta" versions, resolving some bugs (this can break other things) and introducing some new features. I agree with valinet, that initial approach, where pre-release (not completely tested) versions were offered to all, was quiet risky.

Version marked as reasonably stable, is released version.. 39.1 atm

AndreTen said:

Oh, not so complicated. Those are "beta" versions, resolving some bugs (this can break other things) and introducing some new features. I agree with valinet, that initial approach, where pre-release (not completely tested) versions were offered to all, was quiet risky.

Version marked as reasonably stable, is released version.. 39.1 atm

Click to expand...

Yeah, he also often makes changes to the latest pre-release, often several times a day and in such a way that the version number is kept the same so the file in "Assets" gets changed to a new build. These specific changes should not impact the functionality in any way, as he explained that they are just a result of him deciding to do something in a different way, i.e. not worth the extra effort for him to add yet another new pre-release version each time. I am currently running 40.9 because the Simple Window Switcher is like heaven, and, you can now close a window while holding down Alt + Tab, by pressing the mousewheelbutton on it. Convenience overdose. The Windows 11 Window Switcher is just a bad joke in comparison, it's actually quite sad TBH.

Windows update has changed the build to 22000.376 (release version) and ExplorerPatcher still works fine so I guess the symbol files haven't changed

Yeah, the deal with pre-releases and releases is pretty simple, same as @AndreTen summarized.

In the beginning, releases served on GitHub were created manually, where I uploaded binaries compiled on my own machine, wrote the release notes etc.

Some time after that, as the project grew, rightful concerns were drawn about how safe these builds are, plus, it was getting tiring to always have to upload binaries myself, otherwise people had to set up their own build infrastructure to keep up with the upstream. GitHub offers a configurable and free service where it can build the project for you, and also upload binaries etc. Basically an automation. Builds are done in virtual machines that are reset after every build, so they’re in a clean state. So it was natural I implemented and switched to that.

That’s what the industry calls CI/CD. Aka continuous integration, continuous deployment. The idea that modern software is continuously worked on and deployed with customers that test it, report issues, those get fixed and so on. It’s not about whether the testers are internal or external (like Windows Insider), but rather the fact that the same testing is done all the times. Idk, I don’t fully agree with that, the classic approach is still fine depending on the project imo, it meant working in a so-called sprint, pile up features altogether, some versions may have got broken but you keep adding, at some point you say stop, and from there on there’s another period or only bug fixes and testing. Yeah, here’s not that much the case of either approach, but rather building with GitHub filled nicely the other concerns above more than adhering to the CI/CD philosophy per se.

So I switched to that. And it made sense to have it build the software every time I pushed a change to the repository. Then, what next?

At first, I set it up to also create a release every time I pushed things. At some point immediately after I realized that can be quite troublesome, as some changes are very minor, some may break stuff unintentionally etc. I mean, Git also has branches, think like snapshots of the project at some point upon which you work and implement or test something or whatever independent of the master branch. But it did not really make sense here, as a lot of the stuff, I knew it had to land in master, it was something to implement, it just took a while and a few tries (read: commits) until done right. And yeah, initially all that generated a new release.

Furthermore, when I implemented the updater, it was natural to have it serve releases from GitHub, I did not want to create and maintain a separate infrastructure, it did not make any sense to me. But then it got annoying when I wanted to push several commits a day and people got 3-4 updates a day, and most contained just small stuff, incremental changes. That with me also piling up commits locally, as I observed I was keeping commits locally for more, because I understood it was disturbing to push too often. But that doesn’t make sense: what’s the point of a remote Git host if you delay pushing to it, both as a backup, as well as for others having access to and collaborating on the latest stuff?

So then I said, okay, I will have it stop building releases on every push and cherry pick myself some commit and build releases for that using GitHub’s infrastructure. Like, it became especially annoying with the updater because it made it so painless to get new versions, but on the other hand, sometimes I may, by mistake or as a side effect, break some things etc, and it was quite annoying to have that happen for people not interested in testing, I admit that.

And that’s largely how it is today and is pretty logical. But, even better, some people got used to having instant access to builds containing the latest additions minutes after it was pushed, so some were not so happy if I were to stop that. So then, I thought, let’s have it build the software on every push, but publish that as a “pre-release”. That’s not what the home page offers, you have to seek it out in the “Releases” page or manually opt in in the updater. This way, whoever is interested in the latest and greatest as soon as it happens can use that, with all the ups and downs of that approach, while for general usage, I handpick some version from time to time and promote that pre-release to release status, and that gets offered on the home page etc.

Now, the order in the releases page is controlled by GitHub and may sometimes go crazy, I can’t do anything about that.

Regarding file versions. These basically mean nothing, but are kept there because people are used to “versions”. What really matters are commits. Every time I push a commit, a pre-release is built, as I said. A commit is identified by a SHA256 sum of its contents, and is rather unique as far as a project is concerned, which is what matters. The version of a pre-release on the other hand, that is taken from a file in the source code. I update that file manually. And the version is incremented every time something relatively major happens. Ofc, as someone above noted, I don’t increment that with every commit, as it doesn’t make sense. They are a general indicator of around which commits a version is based on, but not an exact pinpoint. If I fix a typo, it doesn’t make sense to increment the version, for e.g. the difference in nature is infered from the commit SHA256, the version still indicates the same, as it is basically the same, understand what I mean? I would use SHA256 commits as release names and versions, but that’s less human friendly and not really supported by the executable format in Windows, but mainly not as human friendly. Also, it’s not that often that I push without bumping the version, but it indeed happens quite a few times.

When will be the next release? Idk, seems to me current pre-release builds stabilize, so I’d say soon. As mentioned, I also saw how a new Windows CU is or was just released, so the timing aligns rather well. There were some rough edges with the first few pre-releases after the current 39.1 release. I think it was good that those versions reached only the people willing to test. Now that the stuff is ironed out, there’s bigger confidence to push it to everyone without fearing that this here or the GitHub Discussions page will explode.

Are releases 100% bug free? Ofc not, I am still a single guy “battling” an army, but I am doing my best and mitigating and trying to improve it as best as I know.

The-Hive said:

Windows update has changed the build to 22000.376 (release version) and ExplorerPatcher still works fine so I guess the symbol files haven't changed

Click to expand...

Yeah, checked it out now. Indeed, `StartDocked.dll` and `twinui.pcshell.dll` from 348 are the same in 376. Some time ago I switched from checking against Windows builds to checking against the MD5 sum of the file in question (basically checking whether the files differ). It pays off now, as I got it working in 376 "for free". If I were to hardcode the offsets for 348 specifically, now I would have had to issue an update (with hardcoded offsets, or to rely on the built-in symbol download mechanism), even though the offsets were the same. I mean, I still kind of do need to issue an update, mentioning how it's now tested on 376 etc. Branding, basically =)))

Thanks @valinet for taking the time and explan it in details.

I'm Windows insider, so why not being a beta-tester for EP too. Pre-release it is then. But I'm mostly interested in Taskbar and Windows 10 clock flyout (ungrouped app icons, and calendar with agenda..). I can live with other Win 11 stuff

Keep on the great work.

Pre-reease is now on ...376.40.16

Latest changes:

• Safeguards to prevent malicious executions on update mechanism hijacks for systems where User Account Control is disabled (#567) (.13)
• Option to prevent certain Control Panel links from being redirected to the Settings app (.14), including in build 22523 (.15)
• Settings are now stored in HKEY_CURRENT_USER\Software\ExplorerPatcher so that Windows does not reset them anymore across major OS updates (#576) (.16)

Click to expand...

Quite interesting about the new location for settings

The-Hive said:

Quite interesting about the new location for settings

Click to expand...

Yes, no fixing after new builds anymore.. Not that it was much to do. Most of the settings were kept for me

Same here @AndreTen, mine has always been good

Valinet (EP) is at version ...40.18

Changes:

• mproved Properties UI layout by reducing wasted space and eliminating redundant elements (#590) (.17)
• Support for the Win+Alt+D shortcut to activate the clock flyout, as in Windows 10 (#591) (.17)
• Fixes for Windows 11 taskbar:
  • As shipped by Microsoft, a taskbar displayed on a secondary monitor does not react when the mouse is over it and auto hide is on; fixed this (#589) (.17)
  • As shipped by Microsoft, under certain circumstances, the main taskbar does not show its system tray when explorer starts up and auto hide is on; fixed this (.17)
  • As shipped by Microsoft, a taskbar displayed on a secondary monitor might display a wrong contextual menu when auto hide is on; fixed this (.17)
  • The clock flyouts now display correctly when using this taskbar
  • Fixed a bug that displayed wrong window previews when the combine taskbar buttons option was set to never combine (#564) (.17)
  • Possibility to set position on screen (top/bottom) from the Properties UI
• Restoring default settings only asks for elevation if required (for the moment, only if you have registered the application as shell extension) (.18)

Click to expand...

Still Pre-release...Still waiting for Released

40.21 is the latest release. A lot of fixes

Sorry @AndreTen I posted it already in software and apps yesterday, I forgot about this thread

Warning!
Problems with EP in the latest Dev build. Explorer wont start with EP installed. Had to uninstall it manually (Task managers - run cmd - rename EP_setup to EP_uninstall and run it)

AndreTen said:

Warning!
Problems with EP in the latest Dev build. Explorer wont start with EP installed. Had to uninstall it manually (Task managers - run cmd - rename EP_setup to EP_uninstall and run it)

Click to expand...

The ability to uninstall by renaming it to ep_uninstall.exe was introduced in 22000.376.40.4, but you could still simply run
ep_setup /uninstall instead. But anyway. I haven't experienced the problem of explorer not starting in a long while. Specifically, this was fixed for me permanently in 22000.376.40.15.

hdmi said:

The ability to uninstall by renaming it to ep_uninstall.exe was introduced in 22000.376.40.4, but you could still simply run
ep_setup /uninstall instead. But anyway. I haven't experienced the problem of explorer not starting in a long while. Specifically, this was fixed for me permanently in 22000.376.40.15.

Click to expand...

My warnig is for the latest Insider's Dev build