On Mon, Nov 03, 2014 at 12:39:37PM -0800, Dav Clark wrote: > Smart windows-hacker types... > > I have just recently gotten chocolatey_ to work (in classic Bay Area > form: Chocolatey is Homebrew_ for windows). Is this a reasonable > recommendation for a step up from the SWC installer?
I'm not a Windows user, but I'm all for package managers. If folks want to use a binary package manager like chocolatey or conda, that would be great :). It looks like chocolatey *does* package a Windows build of GNU Make [1,2] (I don't think conda does). I'm not sure how consistently folks will be able to get through the chocolatey install, or how well chocolatey-installed software interacts with natively-installed software (e.g. if they already have R installed, will both R and chocolatey packages be accessable from the shell?). Cheers, Trevor [1]: https://chocolatey.org/packages/make [2]: http://gnuwin32.sourceforge.net/packages/make.htm -- This email may be signed or encrypted with GnuPG (http://www.gnupg.org). For more information, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pretty_Good_Privacy
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ Discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.software-carpentry.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss_lists.software-carpentry.org
