They've really started to run into the same problems that MacPorts solved long ago. Considering the their page title is "Homebrew -- MacPorts driving you to drink? Try Homebrew!", I find pleasure in their difficulty. The only thing I wish we did that they do is git. But we don't forbid it, so eh.
--Mark _______________________ Mark E. Anderson <e...@emer.net> On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 8:44 AM, Arno Hautala <a...@alum.wpi.edu> wrote: > On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 4:12 PM, Art McGee <amc...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Homebrew is mainly intended to be used by developers who use their system > > almost exclusively for development. They are unconcerned with the > effects of > > mucking with /usr/local and it's ownership or permissions. > > I know this is getting off topic, but I disagree with this assessment. > While I'm sure there are developers that use Homebrew, I think the > primary audience is the average user who "just wants it to work" (I'm > sure that demographic includes developers as well). Specifically, the > user who doesn't understand why MacPorts is taking so long to install > so many things when all they want is one tool. They're probably > already running as an administrator and are the only user on the > system, so who cares if /usr/local is set world writeable? From a > certain point of view, that seems valid, but it does ignore the > reasons that led to MacPorts' "complexity" and the steps that MacPorts > has taken to mitigate some of those concerns (ie. pre-built packages). > > -- > arno s hautala /-| a...@alum.wpi.edu > > pgp b2c9d448 > _______________________________________________ > macports-users mailing list > macports-users@lists.macosforge.org > https://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-users >
_______________________________________________ macports-users mailing list macports-users@lists.macosforge.org https://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-users
