appget.packages

It looks like MS doesn't copy the source code but they uses a bit similar yaml format. I also agree he should credited more. https://github.com/microsoft/winget-cli https://github.com/appget/appget https://github.com/microsoft/winget-pkgs/blob/master/manifes... https://github.com/appget/appget.packages/blob/master/manife...

It is a sad day. But let my congratulate you. You and countless other made impossible. Created community Microsoft could not ignore. It had to adopt, it had to change. Scary beast really. It does not know how to work with, it knows how to ride. It took path you've paved. I see it - there is no dependency resolution, no make dependencies - as simple as possible so people can participate. More like Flatpack than apt. Microsoft does not like fragmentation. There would be a big pull of users. It's interesting how they are going to fight mallware, spyware, ransomware. Issues like chrome Stylish and npm leftpad. With all respect it is not clear you could manage it, there is quite a list in the queue [0]. Please don't despair, you've made gift to community not Microsoft. [0] https://github.com/appget/appget.packages/pulls

Not disagreeing with you, but I think it's better to make it a little bit more clear what exactly was copied. Reading the article mentioned in the OP, the main selling point for appget seems to be that the packages are written in yaml: > Do you want to know how Microsoft WinGet works? go read the article (https://keivan.io/appget-what-chocolatey-wasnt/) But that alone doesn't particularly strike me as a completely novel approach on its own. Looking at package definitions for firefox across various package managers, you can notice that they all look somewhat similar to some degree. Though one could argue that appget and winget looks more similar than others, I'm not sure this is wholesale copying without digging into more details. But again, I'm not trying to argue that it's not, and I also agree the OP should've received more credit. appg

take a look at appget, we use windows itself as the source of truth. so even if an app self updates, or you have installed the app manually or even using chocolate, appget will know the _currently_ installed version. also, we don't run some random PowerShell script written by god-knows-who on your machine. All installs are driven by pure data, so the only thing you need to trust is the appget client itself. e.g. https://github.com/appget/appget.packages/blob/master/manife...

Disclaimer: I'm the author/maintainer for AppGet [0]. What you explained here is one of the main selling points (as in convincing, appget is completely free) for appget. AppGet pretty much automates what you explained here and more. We automatically download and validate SHA256 of downloads (We have a strict policy of only allowing releases from the official source) All package info that is used to install applications are fully public in our GitHub repository [1] (think homebrew) Also, for less tech-savvy users, they can install applications through our gallery e.g. https://appget.net/packages/i/chrome using appget as long as they have appget installed on the machine. [0] https://appget.net [1] https://github.com/appget/appget.packages/tree/master/manife...

Great question, We have support for Tags, similar to the way docker handles tags, however, we only apply them to packages that make sense. take a look at https://docs.appget.net/manifests/#tags-and-versions for more explanation. Here are some examples: https://github.com/appget/appget.packages/tree/master/manife... https://github.com/appget/appget.packages/tree/master/manife... but as I said, I'm pretty open to suggestions on how to make this better. feel free to ping me or open a github issue if you have any ideas, suggestions.