3 ms·
As the person who has probably influenced Homebrew's policy on this the most: I'm very pleased to read this, thanks for saying it! I was also reading this link
by mikemcquaid 3y ago
As the person who has probably influenced Homebrew's policy on this the most: I'm very pleased to read this, thanks for saying it!
I was also reading this link today to think more about how Homebrew can handle this stuff better.
To me the main differentiation is "is the package for an application or a library?". If it's a library: it's a trickier balance. If it's an application: vendoring the e.g. NPM/RubyGems modules is most likely to create the best, most useful experience for the user, upstream creator and Homebrew maintainers.
- nerdponx 3y agoAs a very very occasional and light-duty packaging contributor, IMO the best thing Homebrew can do at this point is start writing much better docs for packagers. The Ruby API doc is very difficult to navigate if you aren't already a Ruby programmer. And it's very hard to know what the "right way" is for doing anything, other than browsing other formulas and hoping you land on a useful example. This is another area where Homebrew has an opportunity to do better than the alternatives. Making it faster wouldn't hurt either, but that's another story ;)