5 ms·
From https://github.com/cli/cli#installation-and-upgrading https://github.com/cli/cli#installation-and-upgrading > gh is available via scoop And I've been usi
by tilolebo 7y ago
From https://github.com/cli/cli#installation-and-upgrading https://github.com/cli/cli#installation-and-upgrading
> gh is available via scoop
And I've been using chocolatey the whole time :facepalm.
How does scoop compare to choco? (Except for the obvious "no admin permissions needed")
- vips7L 7y agoI've never used Choco, but scoop is fantastic. It's very easy to contribute to and use.
- rumblefrog 7y agoFrom my experience, I find that Chocolately has way more packages in their main "bucket" compared to searching for buckets with choco, however, I do like the isolation of installed programs with choco.
- GordonS 7y agoScoop is more opinionated, in that there is a single, canonical version of each app. My experience with chocolately is very different, as there are often multiple different packaged versions of any given app, and you've no idea which is the "best" one.
- tilolebo 7y agoI usually go for the one with the most downloads, but it's true that it can be confusing. Reminds me of the SUSE package web search back in the days.
- iza 7y agoSee https://github.com/lukesampson/scoop/wiki/Chocolatey-Comparison https://github.com/lukesampson/scoop/wiki/Chocolatey-Compari... In general it is much simpler in its design and implementation. Most packages are portable and do not use installers. It doesn't have quite as many packages as chocolatey though.
- ss3000 7y agoSwitched from chocolatey to scoop a while ago and never looked back. Most package installs don't need admin rights, and for those that do, there's the `sudo` package that it recommends, which is a life saver when working with the terminal on Windows in general.