Live data from Hacker News

Homebrew 3.0

brew.sh

261–270 of 516 posts

Re: Homebrew 3.0

#261
post #8
post #3

I can’t even begin to imagine how much value Max Howell (creator of Homebrew) has added to the world. It’s the recommended package manager at every place I’ve worked at and saves so much headache. I use Linux at home and package managers like AUR are great, but macOS is where the users are.

Was it him who was turned down by Apple and Google, after he built homebrew...?

We need to move on from this particular gossips/memes.

Re: Homebrew 3.0

#262
post #195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes. I'm really torn about brew. On the one hand, I hate to crap on the work that the maintainers have done, and it's clearly the best thing out there for macos. On the other hand, it's a terrible dictatorial piece of software that wants to command precisely how you use your computer; those same maintainers are actively hostile to users, as evidenced by the endless stream of nasty responses to issues, arbitrary chang…

> it's a terrible dictatorial piece of software that wants to command precisely how you use your computer I've also seen examples of where Homebrew is basically dictating on how to release your software as well. There was that one case where they decided to delete the formula for mpv since mpv didn't have a recent enough of a tagged release. https://github.com/danielbair/homebrew-core/commit/b18f104f1... There was al…

[deleted]

Re: Homebrew 3.0

#264
post #247

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I already stopped using Mac, but for people still using Mac: you really should give nixpkgs a try.

+1. I’ve been using it for a while, and it fixes my problems with homebrew - mostly that homebrew breaks features every couple of weeks in small point releases, which you get automatically upgraded to

Auto upgrade sucks but it is possible to turn it off

Re: Homebrew 3.0

#265
post #247

Earlier quoted context omitted.

+1. I’ve been using it for a while, and it fixes my problems with homebrew - mostly that homebrew breaks features every couple of weeks in small point releases, which you get automatically upgraded to

Auto upgrade sucks but it is possible to turn it off

But then what? You still have to deal with the mess when you do manual upgrades.

Re: Homebrew 3.0

#266
post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

+1. i like it but yes if i dont use it everyday and 2 weeks later go to brew install something, omg it has some gigantic update to do before i can brew install anything.

so, you don't do a 'yum update' before installing software on your system (or 'apt-get update' or whatever)? Are you also the type of person that refuses to update system software because "it takes too long, and I'm too busy"?

I have the same issue and for me there is a simple difference:

I probably use homebrew for a handfull of tools, in debian etc. my packagetmanager manages everything.

Its not a huge issue but the thought of 'ah shit i need to run update' comes with 'that will be slow'

Re: Homebrew 3.0

#267

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> dictatorial piece of software Isn't that generally the point, for Apple consumers? At HN we have a skewed sample but I imagine for a lot of users (myself included), having an easy solution with configurations set for you is exactly what they want.

Not for developers, no. "Normal" Apple consumers have little reason to use brew.

I think that's a false dichotomy. I think there are plenty of "normal" Apple consumers who may not be an HN-level hacker but would still be considered "developers".

Re: Homebrew 3.0

#268
post #226

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not parent, and I'm not going to say it sucks, the project takes a lot of work from a lot of people and I ain't the one pissing on other people's work, it definitely could use some improvements syntax wise though, What was it, brew install? Brew cask? Oh , now is brew cask install... or was it brew install --cask? I get the analogy, but being a package manager, but was it really that bad to use 'brew install', 'brew…

Do you mean apt or apt-get or apt-get install or was it apt-install --get?

even on old infrastructure its already apt and nothing else anymore. So they advanced.

Re: Homebrew 3.0

#269

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes. I'm really torn about brew. On the one hand, I hate to crap on the work that the maintainers have done, and it's clearly the best thing out there for macos. On the other hand, it's a terrible dictatorial piece of software that wants to command precisely how you use your computer; those same maintainers are actively hostile to users, as evidenced by the endless stream of nasty responses to issues, arbitrary chang…

> dictatorial piece of software Isn't that generally the point, for Apple consumers? At HN we have a skewed sample but I imagine for a lot of users (myself included), having an easy solution with configurations set for you is exactly what they want.

That's what I want.

I build web apps for a living, and I used to do it by contracting. I don't have time, patience or interest for fiddly configuration. I want a mostly-good initial experience so I can get on with my work rather than mess about with my tools. I'm aware there's some gain to be had by knowing more about my tools, but the payoff isn't obvious enough to make me change my ways.

Thanks for being mostly-great, brew.

Re: Homebrew 3.0

#270
post #195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes. I'm really torn about brew. On the one hand, I hate to crap on the work that the maintainers have done, and it's clearly the best thing out there for macos. On the other hand, it's a terrible dictatorial piece of software that wants to command precisely how you use your computer; those same maintainers are actively hostile to users, as evidenced by the endless stream of nasty responses to issues, arbitrary chang…

> it's a terrible dictatorial piece of software that wants to command precisely how you use your computer I've also seen examples of where Homebrew is basically dictating on how to release your software as well. There was that one case where they decided to delete the formula for mpv since mpv didn't have a recent enough of a tagged release. https://github.com/danielbair/homebrew-core/commit/b18f104f1... There was al…

That one doesn't seem unreasonable. They have a "we only support tagged releases" policy. mpv moved away from tagging releases for a bit, and their latest tagged release couldn't build on current MacOS. So they switched it to the part of their system (casks) that supports downloading and installing arbitrary binaries instead.

I think it's a fair conflict, too. For a package manager, saying "just download and compile master wherever it is right now" is rough, and I can understand them not wanting to have to look at mpv's repo and pick a good commit to pin as their "release". Offloading picking a stable release point to someone else is legitimate.

Post reply on HN