Chocolatey install for ScreenShot Captor?

[absoblogginlutely]

The chocolately install for Screenshotcaptor (https://chocolatey.org/packages/screenshotcaptor) has a suspicious version number listed and has not been updated for 3 years or so.
I'm not sure if this is an official build or not but was wondering if there was any interest in updating/creating a chocolatey package for Screenshotcaptor.

I've not created a package in chocolatey before but if an official version is not available from mouser, then this would be a good exercise for me as I would use it myself (and I'd probably have my own package to install my .ini file for my suggested preferences). I've demoed SC to people and persuaded them to buy it and spend a while setting it up for them in my recommended way,

[mouser]

Hi absoblogginlutely!

There is no official chocolatey build, so please by all means go for it!! 

[absoblogginlutely]

Well I did some more digging over the weekend and it turns out the existing one actually works and brings down the latest version whenever it is run- I'm just not quite sure why the version number is weird. It doesn't do a completely silent install though and should really pull down a particular version of the file so chocolately can check if an update is required.
I've created a new package that fixes the above (but does need to be updated whenever a new version of SC is released. That bit I've not quite worked out how to code around yet......

[wraith808]

Have you tried to contact the maintainers?

https://chocolatey.org/packages/screenshotcaptor/ContactOwners

They might be able to correct the issue rather than creating a new package, especially if you're not as familiar with the platform.

[absoblogginlutely]

I did get my own version working as a start. On one of my machines I have my own package - the other I have the official version. The official version installs it ok, but it does not update to the newer version. This is because it's using an old methodology to just grab the original .exe which is always named the same. Newer packages require the name and a checksum and then the chocolatey package needs to be updated with the new version and the new checksum. Haven't had a chance to play with updating that yet but thats the next step.
I haven't heard back from the maintainers so once i've got my internal package working I'll be applying to take it over.