Skip to content

Navigation Menu

Sign in
Appearance settings

Search code, repositories, users, issues, pull requests...

Provide feedback

We read every piece of feedback, and take your input very seriously.

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Sign up
Appearance settings

Add Uninstaller Switches and Success Codes to Manifest Schema#5734

Open
dkbennett wants to merge 7 commits intomicrosoft:master from
dkbennett:UninstallSchemaUpdate
Open

Add Uninstaller Switches and Success Codes to Manifest Schema #5734
dkbennett wants to merge 7 commits intomicrosoft:master from
dkbennett:UninstallSchemaUpdate

Conversation

@dkbennett
Copy link
Member

@dkbennett dkbennett commented Sep 22, 2025
edited by microsoft-github-policy-service bot
Loading

Motivated by issue #1885 but does not complete it.

This adds the UninstallerSwitches and UninstallerSuccessCodes to the manifest schema for 1.12 and all related tests and validation.

  • UninstallerSwitches are a subset of the InstallerSwitches
  • UninstallerSuccessCodes are essentially identical to InstallerSuccessCodes

Neither of these fields are consumed yet, this is updating the schema to support their addition.

Tested:

  • RestSource tests and ManifestValidation tests pass

Microsoft Reviewers: Open in CodeFlow

Copy link
Member

@JohnMcPMS JohnMcPMS left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I feel like adding all of these to the schema without an implementation and/or plan on how to consume them will result in values that are unusable. Silent already has a meaning since there is silent ARP entry data. What do we do if a silent switch is present with that ARP data? Interactive is the default assumption for uninstall ARP command line; when would we use the interactive switch?

If they exist in 1.12 schema but aren't implemented, people can add them without effect until they suddenly light up at some point in the future. This is really the blocking issue to me. I can imagine a path forward, even if it isn't clearly defined today, for all of the switches. But allowing for these to be defined in manifests in winget-pkgs without any validation beyond "the manifest parses" seems very bad.

Copy link
Contributor

Trenly commented Sep 24, 2025

Interactive is the default assumption for uninstall ARP command line;

I thought the default was:

  • If the ARP contains SilentUninstallString use that
  • Otherwise, fall back to UninstallString

Copy link
Member

Interactive is the default assumption for uninstall ARP command line;

I thought the default was:

  • If the ARP contains SilentUninstallString use that
  • Otherwise, fall back to UninstallString

I wasn't complete enough in my statement: Interactive is the default assumption for the UninstallString value behavior.

@microsoft-github-policy-service microsoft-github-policy-service bot added Needs-Attention Issue needs attention from Microsoft and removed Needs-Author-Feedback Issue needs attention from issue or PR author labels Sep 25, 2025
@denelon denelon moved this from In Progress to On Hold in WinGet Dec 10, 2025
@denelon denelon removed this from WinGet Dec 18, 2025
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Reviewers

@JohnMcPMS JohnMcPMS JohnMcPMS requested changes

@yao-msft yao-msft Awaiting requested review from yao-msft

+1 more reviewer

@Trenly Trenly Trenly left review comments

Reviewers whose approvals may not affect merge requirements

Requested changes must be addressed to merge this pull request.

Labels

Needs-Attention Issue needs attention from Microsoft

Projects

None yet

Milestone

No milestone

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

AltStyle によって変換されたページ (->オリジナル) /