I'd hesitate to use it...
* I doubt that it's widely used by the typical novice, and it may be
perceived as yet another weird thing to install and get used to.
* The chocolatey webpage has jargon that may be off-putting to a novice.
For example: "Chocolatey NuGet is a Machine Package Manager, somewhat
like apt-get" is fine for someone with linux and package management
experience, but I'd bet but this is not the typical windows-using novice.
* The current SWC installer has the advantage of being familiar to even
the most basic windows user, minimizing cognitive load.
On 3/11/2014 12:54 PM, W. Trevor King wrote:
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
_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.software-carpentry.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss_lists.software-carpentry.org
_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.software-carpentry.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss_lists.software-carpentry.org
