31–40 of 311 posts
FWIW the author of Homebrew is also working on a next generation package manager in rust: https://pkgx.dev/ (beware facebook tracking and infinite AI slop)
https://github.com/pkgxdev/pantry/pull/5360#issuecomment-233...
What is it doing better than homebrew ?
Given homebrew was strictly worse than the tool it displaced, I’m not sure it’s the right question to ask. MacOS package management is strictly marketing based.
That was it, that's why I switched, nothing more, nothing less.
> WARNING: ALPHA SOFTWARE > Sapphire is experimental, under heavy development, and may be unstable. Use at your own risk! Ruby seems fine for brew. Does this do anything else better? Ruby makes it easy to write recipes for it which is a huge boon for a package manager.
The main reason I find brew to be a bit slow is just a lack of parallelism with regards to downloads and installs. Rather brew does alternating and sequential D, I, D, I, D, I, when I wish it just kept downloading in the background when it is doing the installs. It would cut down the brew upgrade time by 30% or more at the cost of more disk space used during the process.
But this one qualm I have isn't a result of its language implementation at all.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Given homebrew was strictly worse than the tool it displaced, I’m not sure it’s the right question to ask. MacOS package management is strictly marketing based.
That’s not fair. Homebrew has been fantastic. It’s also open source, did they not accept your pull requests for these “improvements”?
What is it doing better than homebrew ?
Given homebrew was strictly worse than the tool it displaced, I’m not sure it’s the right question to ask. MacOS package management is strictly marketing based.
FWIW the author of Homebrew is also working on a next generation package manager in rust: https://pkgx.dev/ (beware facebook tracking and infinite AI slop)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Given homebrew was strictly worse than the tool it displaced, I’m not sure it’s the right question to ask. MacOS package management is strictly marketing based.
That’s not fair. Homebrew has been fantastic. It’s also open source, did they not accept your pull requests for these “improvements”?
I don’t think you are being fair. This question presupposes that the supposed problems can be solved by iterative changes, rather than being inherent in the chosen design/architecture of the software, which usually requires complete replacement thereof (as well as the leadership thereof, as people who choose poor solutions to problems often can’t appreciate arguments for superior solutions).
(Not that I’m trying to suggest that I agree that homebrew in particular is bad — just speaking generally.)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Given homebrew was strictly worse than the tool it displaced, I’m not sure it’s the right question to ask. MacOS package management is strictly marketing based.
Macports was less ergonomic imho, which caused the community to shift to homebrew.
Also, using Git + GitHub instead of SVN + Trac was absolutely a winning pick for scaling project participation back in the 2000s.