>Our package manager will be open source too so obviously we would welcome any contribution from you
i love freetard tears ngl. he should stop complaining and contribute to winget.
>Use extremely permissive license that outright allows other to take the project and close source it >Company takes the project and close sources it >Cry
What a retard
It's not great but it's better than nothing.
Nothing worse than some homosexual package manager going MIA and not updating / maintaining it.
Winget is limited but is fine for basic installs.
>What do package management and having executables have to do with each other? Nothing. You realise Linux still has executable files right?
Let me interject for a moment, the reason why package managers exist is to poorly fix the dependency management issue. That's what you get for basing an OS on the outdated Unix model where dependencies are shared. Windows doesn't have this problem because of three things, stable shared system dependencies, frameworks and packaging the most important dependencies for that program in the same root folder of the program.
Your post has nothing to do with his post where he implies that Linux doesn't have executables. That implication makes no sense because Linux obviously has executable files.
>packaging the most important dependencies for that program in the same root folder of the program
Then you have duplication of dependencies.
>Then you have duplication of dependencies.
Why does that matter, we today have more storage than any unix dev would have ever dreamed off? Software developers build against an exact version of a dependencies literally the minuscule change can fuck up the working of programs, and trying to make programs use all the same dependency is recipe for disaster.
>Your post has nothing to do with his post where he implies that Linux doesn't have executables. That implication makes no sense because Linux obviously has executable files.
This isn't even a midwit reply. This is well-below-average-wit. Please consider blowing your brains out.
That's wrong though. E.g. if I want to upgrade Node then running `winget upgrade OpenJS.NodeJS.LTS` is way, way less effort than going to their website, downloading an installer, and running the installer. Sure maybe you'll manage Node with nvm-windows but that's basically a package manager itself, essentially.
>>why is .... windows so bad? >because it's windows. anyone with a room temp IQ has already ditched it
Bait posters should be getting the death sentence.
>want to upgrade my calculator for rounded buttons >package manager insists on upgrading my c library and kernel >breaks them
you can keep that shit for yourself linuxtards
Msft has no actual supported channels. If they just took ownership of package management, it would be way more secure and in turn more usable. Right now it's a good product but things are unmaintained and you can't trust the repo's be default.
>package management
just go to the url and download the installer
This. When in Rome do as the Romans do. There's no reason to use pseudo-package managers on Windows.
winget works fine for me
winget is literally stolen
https://www.thurrott.com/windows/windows-10/235783/appget-creator-says-microsoft-stole-his-product
looks good to me
how do you steal a curl and unzip frontend
>half a million loc
>"just a curl frontend"
moron
>half a million loc
>for a package manager
lmao and people call dpkg bloated
checked. actually it is 100k but still bloated for a glorified curl.
>Our package manager will be open source too so obviously we would welcome any contribution from you
i love freetard tears ngl. he should stop complaining and contribute to winget.
>Use extremely permissive license that outright allows other to take the project and close source it
>Company takes the project and close sources it
>Cry
What a retard
>cukc licence
Many such cases.
>winget upgrade --all
>half of them fail
yeah ok
Winget, just like everything Microsoft has created in the past years, is absolute garbage. Even Windows has turned into utter garbage.
It's a bit annoying that the packages aren't up to date though
dude winget sucks dicks
>winget works fine for me
Till it randomly stops working again, having to reset the repos.
Why is it bad?
Also Winget exists.
do you know about winget?
It's not great but it's better than nothing.
Nothing worse than some homosexual package manager going MIA and not updating / maintaining it.
Winget is limited but is fine for basic installs.
scoop works fine
chocolatey is awful
haven't tried winget
This, just use scoop; Even though I will add that it can be annoying for setting it up on an admin account.
scoop is awesome and it just works
package management is fucking stupid and i'm glad windows has executables
What do package management and having executables have to do with each other? Nothing. You realise Linux still has executable files right?
>What do package management and having executables have to do with each other? Nothing. You realise Linux still has executable files right?
Let me interject for a moment, the reason why package managers exist is to poorly fix the dependency management issue. That's what you get for basing an OS on the outdated Unix model where dependencies are shared. Windows doesn't have this problem because of three things, stable shared system dependencies, frameworks and packaging the most important dependencies for that program in the same root folder of the program.
Your post has nothing to do with his post where he implies that Linux doesn't have executables. That implication makes no sense because Linux obviously has executable files.
>packaging the most important dependencies for that program in the same root folder of the program
Then you have duplication of dependencies.
>Then you have duplication of dependencies.
Why does that matter, we today have more storage than any unix dev would have ever dreamed off? Software developers build against an exact version of a dependencies literally the minuscule change can fuck up the working of programs, and trying to make programs use all the same dependency is recipe for disaster.
>Your post has nothing to do with his post where he implies that Linux doesn't have executables. That implication makes no sense because Linux obviously has executable files.
This isn't even a midwit reply. This is well-below-average-wit. Please consider blowing your brains out.
because anyone who cares just uses linjx
windows doesn't need a package manager
needing a package manager is a symptom of a problem, not a benefit.
That's wrong though. E.g. if I want to upgrade Node then running `winget upgrade OpenJS.NodeJS.LTS` is way, way less effort than going to their website, downloading an installer, and running the installer. Sure maybe you'll manage Node with nvm-windows but that's basically a package manager itself, essentially.
>why is .... windows so bad?
because it's windows. anyone with a room temp IQ has already ditched it
>>why is .... windows so bad?
>because it's windows. anyone with a room temp IQ has already ditched it
Bait posters should be getting the death sentence.
>want to upgrade my calculator for rounded buttons
>package manager insists on upgrading my c library and kernel
>breaks them
you can keep that shit for yourself linuxtards
>things that never happened
Scoop, fellow sirs. Do the needful today.
>you will scoop the winpoop
Msft has no actual supported channels. If they just took ownership of package management, it would be way more secure and in turn more usable. Right now it's a good product but things are unmaintained and you can't trust the repo's be default.
Chocolatey is pretty good. It's not much worse than the AUR.