
Ask HN: Do we have a package manager problem? - gosub
Nowadays, every big software project seems to need its own package manager: programming languages, os distributions, virtualization and sandboxing solutions, text editors, programs with plugins... Do they really all have significant different needs? Will we ever have the &#x27;git&#x27; of package managers?
======
gargravarr
It's not generally that bad unless you want the latest and greatest. For
example, on Debian, you can easily install Perl modules from APT instead of
CPAN (which I've found temperamental in practise). The only trouble is that
the modules are often older than those you can get through the dedicated PM
channel (since obviously the maintainers have to package up their release in
line with Debian standards).

Package management is still a much better idea than manual dependency
installation - even NuGet for .Net is an improvement as it supports automatic
restoration of dependencies at build time. However, as we are immersed in so
many different platforms and technologies, it is extremely difficult to have a
one-size-fits-all PM. Linux PMs are probably the closest.

------
stephenr
What is "the git of package managers"? One thing that a very loud group of
people claim is the second coming of jesus without any knowledge of the
alternatives?

I think we have that already with NPM.

Edit: to clarify, I'm not suggesting npm is the 2nd coming. I'm suggesting
people _act_ like it is, ( much as they do with git )

~~~
herbst
Then i could say we have that already with Rubygems.

I always cry a little when a nice looking small tool is distributed trough
NPM. Why? I really dont want and will build those dependencies just for a
stupid mini tool.

