Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Homebrew 1.4.0

brew.sh

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 219 posts

Re: Homebrew 1.4.0

#11

Post by FooBarWidget »

jameskilton wrote: post #8
2bitencryption wrote: post #6

does homebrew still* use Github as the store for all packages? Just curious, that always seemed like a strange scenario. * or am I wrong that it ever did?

"Packages" in homebrew are nothing more than Ruby install files called Formulas[1]. So using Github works really well for their use case and I don't think there is any thought of changing it. Updating homebrew, new formulas, etc, is nothing more than a `git pull`. [1] https://github.com/Homebrew/homebrew-core/tree/master/Formul...

Not quite. They also supply precompiled binaries nowadays, one version of each supported macOS version. They have a CI infrastructure that continuously builds precompiled binaries for all formulas, for all supported macOS versions.

Re: Homebrew 1.4.0

#12

Post by dwc »

2bitencryption wrote: post #6

does homebrew still* use Github as the store for all packages? Just curious, that always seemed like a strange scenario. * or am I wrong that it ever did?

They moved their heavy stuff to bintray, which is a better fit.

Re: Homebrew 1.4.0

#14

Post by jameskilton »

FooBarWidget wrote: post #11
jameskilton wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Packages" in homebrew are nothing more than Ruby install files called Formulas[1]. So using Github works really well for their use case and I don't think there is any thought of changing it. Updating homebrew, new formulas, etc, is nothing more than a `git pull`. [1] https://github.com/Homebrew/homebrew-core/tree/master/Formul...

Not quite. They also supply precompiled binaries nowadays, one version of each supported macOS version. They have a CI infrastructure that continuously builds precompiled binaries for all formulas, for all supported macOS versions.

Right, those binaries are hosted in Bintray (http://homebrew.bintray.com/)

Re: Homebrew 1.4.0

#15

Post by sigzero »

daveFNbuck wrote: post #9
mmastrac wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can disable it if you aren't comfortable with it (they document this clearly multiple places). analytics (on|off) Turn on/off Homebrew's analytics.

I've been using brew for years and wasn't aware that it was using google analytics at all. It may be clearly documented, but they're not doing much to ensure users know about it.

If it is clearly documented that should be it. Maybe a blurb on the main page about it would be nice but not necessary.

Re: Homebrew 1.4.0

#16

Post by joeblau »

drinchev wrote: post #4

The Patreon page says they receive $177 per month. That's too low for a project with such a high popularity and usage. I read somewhere ( and I bet ) it's used by Google / Facebook / Apple employees.

Welcome to open source software. The site I run has 70,000+ monthly unique visitors; It's used by all of the top tech companies, and brings in about $45 a month in ad revenue. I'm not complaining because the only financial costs are my domain hosting. I chalk up my personal time to an educational investment.

I'm sure Homebrew has a significantly higher value, but you've got to weigh the tradeoffs. If Homebrew cost $9.99 a year for access to updates I would pay it, but I know a lot of people would complain.

Re: Homebrew 1.4.0

#17

Post by k_sh »

daveFNbuck wrote: post #9
mmastrac wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can disable it if you aren't comfortable with it (they document this clearly multiple places). analytics (on|off) Turn on/off Homebrew's analytics.

I've been using brew for years and wasn't aware that it was using google analytics at all. It may be clearly documented, but they're not doing much to ensure users know about it.

IIRC, it's mentioned when you install brew

Re: Homebrew 1.4.0

#18

Post by ysavir »

sigzero wrote: post #15
daveFNbuck wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've been using brew for years and wasn't aware that it was using google analytics at all. It may be clearly documented, but they're not doing much to ensure users know about it.

If it is clearly documented that should be it. Maybe a blurb on the main page about it would be nice but not necessary.

Any opt-out features should be disclosed to the user on install. That seems fairly straight forward to me.

Re: Homebrew 1.4.0

#20

Post by daveFNbuck »

sigzero wrote: post #15
daveFNbuck wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've been using brew for years and wasn't aware that it was using google analytics at all. It may be clearly documented, but they're not doing much to ensure users know about it.

If it is clearly documented that should be it. Maybe a blurb on the main page about it would be nice but not necessary.

I feel that if you're collecting data about me and sending it to a third party, there should at least be a clear notice during installation. It should really be opt-in, but at the very least it should be as obvious as they would make it if it were opt-in.
Post reply on HN