[rabbitmq-discuss] Generating a Rabbitmq release
Jason J. W. Williams
jasonjwwilliams at gmail.com
Fri Apr 13 16:48:04 BST 2012
Personally I think a Mac .pkg would be incredibly beneficial to regular developers (college students' needs are a side benefit I think). Homebrew is only slightly less terrible than Macports as a packaging system and there are a ton of devs using OS X as their dev environment using neither as a result.
So it seems to me to be a leg up in an evaluation fight against ActiveMQ, Redis, etc., for Rabbit to have a .pkg installer that drops in the whole kit and kaboodle so the user can get started evaling it's features, and a good thing overall.
Sent via iPhone
Is your email Premiere?
On Apr 13, 2012, at 5:50, Matthew Sackman <matthew at rabbitmq.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 13, 2012 at 12:41:05PM +0100, Matthew Sackman wrote:
>> I agree the packaging issue is a problem, and there has been a lot done
>> to improve this. I do genuinely think that right now, the cloud foundary
>> approach may be a viable alternative if getting going quickly is the
> To be really clear, what I really object to is the reinvention of wheel
> regarding packaging. There are really good solutions out there - vastly
> better than what things like apt/deb offer, which should be very widely
> used but are not. The ongoing mess of homebrew/macports is horrible -
> and seems never to get better; the number of issues we see with rpm
> based systems is also horrific. Even debian based systems are
> essentially useless as unless you're root you can't install packages.
> There are systems out there, eg Nix / NixOS that allow any user to
> install anything and to do it in such a way that it has zero impact on
> other users. They've never caught on, and I find the current mess of
> packaging "solutions" hightly frustrating.
> rabbitmq-discuss mailing list
> rabbitmq-discuss at lists.rabbitmq.com
More information about the rabbitmq-discuss