4 ms·

It'd be nice if people stopped recommending "yet another new and exciting package manager for Windows" that you have no idea of whether you can trust it or not.

It'd be nice if people stopped recommending "yet another new and exciting package manager for Windows" that you have no idea of whether you can trust it or not. Git, Python, llvm, cmake, and curl all have perfectly normal windows installers available from their own websites, and if you're a programmer who has to, or chooses to work on Window, it's a good bet you already have either most or all of these already installed, making the job of completing your bonus objective probably one, maybe two installs at most.

ncruces 2y ago
Scoop is nice because, like homebrew, it's easy for package creators to create their own “buckets” and distribute packages that way.
- TheRealPomax 2y ago
  I'm sure, but it's also "yet another package manager" because everyone has their own favourite package manager. It's a nit, but it's nice when a README.md goes "you need X, Y, and Z" and doesn't pretend you need a specific method for that. Tiny phrasing change, zero real world difference of course, but it's a nice little sign that the folks running a project know that you know what you're doing on the OS you're working with (either by choice, or by paycheque =)
  - abeltensor 2y ago
    Scoop is the main package manager I've been using for years on windows apart from chocolatey. Dunno many others aside from the official windows one: winget.
    - TheRealPomax 2y ago
      I've been using Windows as dev platform since it was called "DOS but don't look too closely", I know chocolatey, ninite, winget, and powershell's own built-in nonsense, and yet had never head of scoop until just now. So... that really just tells us that any application manager we think is popular, ubiquitous, and the obvious choice is still really just a niche program =( Contrast that to brew on MacOS: ever non-devs know about brew.
      - ncruces 2y ago
        And from all of those, which I'd heard of, I think scoop is the only one to allow a package author to just create a git repo, and publish a package that way. Like brew does. That why I use scoop. Chocolatey would rather charge money for that, for some reason, and people are still willing to donate them their free time.
        TheRealPomax 2y ago
        Nice!
beart 2y ago
Ideally, winget would be the way to go, but I haven't had good luck with it. There are a number of limitations and it doesn't feel like a polished and curated repo. It just feels like a wrapper around chocolatey, which has its own problems. Microsoft is the reason alternative package managers exist
niomarketing 2y ago
I totally agree you guys.
quasarj 2y ago
That was my favorite part of this (especially since the build didn't work). Whatever scoop is, it actually worked and installed those things without any complaint... might be my new favorite package manager
- spease 2y ago
  I’ve typically used chocolatey. I think it typically uses the regular installer for a package, just in a headless/unattended mode configured by the maintainer.

ncruces 2y ago

Scoop is nice because, like homebrew, it's easy for package creators to create their own “buckets” and distribute packages that way.

TheRealPomax 2y ago
I'm sure, but it's also "yet another package manager" because everyone has their own favourite package manager. It's a nit, but it's nice when a README.md goes "you need X, Y, and Z" and doesn't pretend you need a specific method for that. Tiny phrasing change, zero real world difference of course, but it's a nice little sign that the folks running a project know that you know what you're doing on the OS you're working with (either by choice, or by paycheque =)
- abeltensor 2y ago
  Scoop is the main package manager I've been using for years on windows apart from chocolatey. Dunno many others aside from the official windows one: winget.
  - TheRealPomax 2y ago
    I've been using Windows as dev platform since it was called "DOS but don't look too closely", I know chocolatey, ninite, winget, and powershell's own built-in nonsense, and yet had never head of scoop until just now. So... that really just tells us that any application manager we think is popular, ubiquitous, and the obvious choice is still really just a niche program =( Contrast that to brew on MacOS: ever non-devs know about brew.
    - ncruces 2y ago
      And from all of those, which I'd heard of, I think scoop is the only one to allow a package author to just create a git repo, and publish a package that way. Like brew does. That why I use scoop. Chocolatey would rather charge money for that, for some reason, and people are still willing to donate them their free time.
      - TheRealPomax 2y ago
        Nice!

beart 2y ago

Ideally, winget would be the way to go, but I haven't had good luck with it. There are a number of limitations and it doesn't feel like a polished and curated repo. It just feels like a wrapper around chocolatey, which has its own problems. Microsoft is the reason alternative package managers exist

niomarketing 2y ago

I totally agree you guys.

quasarj 2y ago

That was my favorite part of this (especially since the build didn't work). Whatever scoop is, it actually worked and installed those things without any complaint... might be my new favorite package manager

spease 2y ago
I’ve typically used chocolatey. I think it typically uses the regular installer for a package, just in a headless/unattended mode configured by the maintainer.