News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Microsoft now credits maker of AppGet but offers no apology. Parent comment

Re:Microsoft now credits maker of AppGet but offers no apology by michaelhoffman on Monday June 01, 2020 @09:59AM (#23378492)
Yeah and recently a lot of Chocolatey scripts are calls to a number of standard helpers for various types of installers. Not a whole lot of arbitrary commands being used.

Having something like YAML seems cleaner than the Chocolatey approach, but there are almost 8,000 Chocolatey packages and it works pretty well. Implementation > architecture here.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Microsoft now credits maker of AppGet but offers no apology by godtoldmetodoit on Monday June 01, 2020 @10:16AM (#23378683)
Yeah it's very dubious to me that YAML is the better approach, at least from the perspective of the average enterprise looking for Windows package management tooling.

There are still too many nasty installers out there, I'd be very worried about the ability to do what I need without a full scripting language at hand.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Microsoft now credits maker of AppGet but offers no apology by michaelhoffman on Monday June 01, 2020 @10:19AM (#23378721)
You can have an approach that is YAML with scripting where necessary. There are so many packages that fit into one of the standard Chocolatey package setups (exe, msi, msu, vsix, zip).

https://chocolatey.org/docs/helpers-install-chocolatey-packa...

[ Parent | on HN ]