21–30 of 39 posts
I wrote an article about a year ago on why Chocolatey is just broken, pretty much all of the issues are still there except a bandaid here and there, https://medium.com/@keivan/why-chocolatey-is-broken-beyond-a...
I'm surprised to see this here, now. Think carefully before using Chocolatey. It is not, never has been, and never will be the default package system for Windows. IMO the writing is on the wall as MS ships OneGet with Windows 10; while I think I read something about the projects working together, or OneGet supporting Chocolatey repositories or something, I don't believe OneGet's 'native format' will be Chocolatey pac…
I laughed at that point because I completely agree that NuGet v2 isn't great at all. Also you forgot to mention that NuGet v3 is brand new and there isn't yet published documentation on how to get from one format to the next - https://github.com/NuGet/Home/issues/1870. Not sure how fast you expect Chocolatey to adopt NuGet v3, but it's a bit much to throw this argument in here as a reason NOT to use Chocolatey.
I'm surprised to see this here, now. Think carefully before using Chocolatey. It is not, never has been, and never will be the default package system for Windows. IMO the writing is on the wall as MS ships OneGet with Windows 10; while I think I read something about the projects working together, or OneGet supporting Chocolatey repositories or something, I don't believe OneGet's 'native format' will be Chocolatey pac…
Mostly because it wasn't created by Microsoft. I mean, let's be realistic here.
I wrote an article about a year ago on why Chocolatey is just broken, pretty much all of the issues are still there except a bandaid here and there, https://medium.com/@keivan/why-chocolatey-is-broken-beyond-a...
You wrote that the Chocolatey Gallery had no formal review process, and in the same month (October 2014), a formal review process was introduced. The community feed on the Chocolatey Gallery has had moderation of packages since October 2014. I shared that information with you at the time we changed the security model in 2014, so I'm slightly disappointed that you failed to acknowledge that aspect has been fixed.
I installed Chocolatey maybe a year ago, because of Atom for Windows. My recollection is that it was rather slow, shortcuts would sometimes break, and it was often unable to uninstall packages. Maybe package management is just hopeless for Windows.
I wrote an article about a year ago on why Chocolatey is just broken, pretty much all of the issues are still there except a bandaid here and there, https://medium.com/@keivan/why-chocolatey-is-broken-beyond-a...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
To clarrify the situation with OneGet, there are a bunch of things that were widely misreported, and a good corrective article here: https://blogs.msdn.microsoft.com/garretts/2015/05/05/10-thin... Some of those 10 points relate to Chocolatey: * 1. OneGet isn’t technically a Package-Manager, it’s more of a Package-Manager-Manager. Its actual purpose is to bring together a diverse set of installers, package services, a…
OneGet sounds like a better name, IMHO. It's catchier, and thus easier to remember, than PackageManagement. Was there a reason for the renaming?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
To clarrify the situation with OneGet, there are a bunch of things that were widely misreported, and a good corrective article here: https://blogs.msdn.microsoft.com/garretts/2015/05/05/10-thin... Some of those 10 points relate to Chocolatey: * 1. OneGet isn’t technically a Package-Manager, it’s more of a Package-Manager-Manager. Its actual purpose is to bring together a diverse set of installers, package services, a…
OneGet sounds like a better name, IMHO. It's catchier, and thus easier to remember, than PackageManagement. Was there a reason for the renaming?