What is the preferred way to distribute a library of VIs?

[Jim_Kring]

---

@lordsathish wrote:

Hey Jim,

If I'm correct we need the professional edition of VIPM for packaging VI's. And this professional edition is not free. Any idea of making it free 

I'm not sure if this is the right place to discuss this. 

Thanks,

Sathish

---

Hi Sathish,

You can create packages with the free Community Edition.  Give it a try 🙂

Thanks,

-Jim

[lordsathish]

Wow, thats good to know 

Then lemme try it.

Thanks,

Sathish

[FTI_Newton]

Extra unnecessary software. Making an installer from LabVIEW itself does everything you need.

[Jim_Kring]

---

@FTI Newton wrote:

Extra unnecessary software. Making an installer from LabVIEW itself does everything you need.

---

Hi FTI Newton,

You're right that you can make an installer from LabVIEW.  There are, however, some things that VIPM does well, that are hard or impossible to do with an MSI-based installer:

• Install library on Mac and Linux
• Install library in multiple LabVIEW versions concurrently and independenty
• Upgrade notification
• Configuration management of which libraries are used in which of your LabVIEW projects
• Easy palette creation
• Integration with LabVIEW 2010+ Licensing and Activation Toolkit
• Dependency and Conflict Management (libraries that call other libraries)
• Refreshing the LabVIEW palettes if LabVIEW is currently running (and other nice integration features)

The bottom line, is that VIPM really focuses on solving all the problems specific to creating installers for LabVIEW add-ons and libraries.  And, if there's something it can't do, it's probably on JKI's radar 🙂

Thanks,

[FTI_Newton]

As a VIPM user myself, I agree with most of that, but not all of it.

For our OP's use case, IMO it's overkill. 

[Jim_Kring]

---

@FTI Newton wrote:

As a VIPM user myself, I agree with most of that, but not all of it.

For our OP's use case, IMO it's overkill. 

---

I'd be happy to hear your feedback about the things you don't feel VIPM addresses well.