HackerReposA FIELD GUIDE TO OPEN SOURCE
ProSponsor the shelf♧ 0
← Back to top all-time
Homebrew
brew
Ruby2016–2026
Homebrew / brew

brew

đŸș The Package Manager for Everywhere

Developer ToolsMobile & Desktop
Explore on GitHubRead Hacker News discussions
158Distinct people
201Mentions
0Explicit recommenders
50.3KGitHub stars
REPOSITORY AT A GLANCE

What to know before exploring

What it is

đŸș The Package Manager for Everywhere

GitHub

Where it is used

No documented product use was verified in the last source check.

What people are saying

No recommendation phrase was found in the indexed comments.

No classified warning is attached to this page. Read the discussions before treating silence as approval.

Also in these discussions

Mentioned in the same Hacker News threads. That is not proof they are substitutes.

This week on Hacker News

Nov 8–Nov 15 UTC · Direct repository links and separately labeled related project stories. Indexed through 11/15/2026, 10:02:05 AM UTC.

No direct repository links were found in the indexed HN discussions over the past seven days. Older discussions are available below.

Mentions over time

HN mentions by year201 dated mentions

Observed mentions: 2016-04-04 18:36:42 UTC to 2026-09-13 13:02:51 UTC.

010203040502016-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2017-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 47 mentions; 7 submissions, 40 comments20162017-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2018-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 16 mentions; 0 submissions, 16 comments2018-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2019-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 8 mentions; 0 submissions, 8 comments2019-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2020-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 13 mentions; 0 submissions, 13 comments2020-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2021-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 29 mentions; 6 submissions, 23 comments2021-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2022-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 36 mentions; 3 submissions, 33 comments20212022-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2023-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 9 mentions; 1 submissions, 8 comments2023-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2024-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 15 mentions; 3 submissions, 12 comments2024-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2025-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 9 mentions; 1 submissions, 8 comments2025-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2026-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 10 mentions; 1 submissions, 9 comments2026-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2027-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 9 mentions; 0 submissions, 9 comments. Incomplete calendar period.2026*

* An incomplete calendar period is marked with an outlined bar. Its count is not directly comparable with a full period.

Counts come from the repository’s dated source evidence. Index cutoff: 2026-11-02 08:16:59 UTC.

View mention counts and date ranges
UTC ranges include their start and exclude their end. Select a period to filter the source evidence.
PeriodStart (UTC)End (exclusive, UTC)MentionsSubmissionsComments
20162016-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2017-01-01 00:00:00 UTC47740
20172017-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2018-01-01 00:00:00 UTC16016
20182018-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2019-01-01 00:00:00 UTC808
20192019-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2020-01-01 00:00:00 UTC13013
20202020-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2021-01-01 00:00:00 UTC29623
20212021-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2022-01-01 00:00:00 UTC36333
20222022-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2023-01-01 00:00:00 UTC918
20232023-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2024-01-01 00:00:00 UTC15312
20242024-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2025-01-01 00:00:00 UTC918
20252025-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2026-01-01 00:00:00 UTC1019
2026 (partial)2026-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2027-01-01 00:00:00 UTC909

What Hacker News says

16 sources
lstamour·Nov 27, 2017
“Neither”? Yes, Ninite is closed, e.g. https://ninite.com/help/notfeatures/more.html But alternatives aren’t: Chocolatey - Apache license - https://github.com/chocolatey/choco Homebrew (for Mac) - BSD license - https://github.com/Homebrew/brew Scoop (as previously mentioned) - Public Domain - https://github.com/lukesampson/scoop Comparing Scoop to Chocolatey: https://github.com/lukesampson/scoop/wiki/Chocolatey-Compari...
In Telerik gets Fiddler unlisted from Chocolatey
pdkl95·Sep 4, 2017
> We don't send any personally identifiable information to Google. Yes, you do. While you use[1] the "Anonymize IP" option, a packet is still sent from the user's IP. Google's business model includes gathering as much data as possible so it's foolish to think that they are throwing data away in this situation. You may disagree and trust Google to honor the "Anonymize IP" option, but trust is not transitive so you shouldn't ever assume users agree (use opt-in in every situation). However, claiming you don't send pii to Google makes me wonder if you have actually read the documentation for GA? The "Anonymize IP" (aid=1) option is blatant doublespeak. From their own documentation[2]: > The IP anonymization feature in Analytics sets the last octet of IPv4 user IP addresses ... They are only masking out the last 8 bits of the address, which ar
Read the rest
e the least interesting bits. You can still discover the ASN from the remaining data. At worst all that option did is add a 1-in-256 guess when correlating your analytics data to the rest of Google's tracking data. That is trivial to overcome Google's massive databases of tracking data. You even provide a unique additional per-install tracking number that lets Google track users when they move to a different IP address. Once a correlation exists between your analytics data and everything else at Google, your analytics events provide a reliable report about that can allows other tracking data to be correlated to the new IP address. Why does that option exist? It's possible that it was designed to mislead developers into sending Google tracking information, but their own documentation[2] suggests a different hypothesis: > This feature is designed to help site owners comply with their own privacy policies or, in some countries, recommendations from local data protection authorities This is a feature designed to check boxes on compliance requirements, not to provide any provide actual anonymity to users. [1] https://github.com/Homebrew/brew/blob/fd4fe3b80cab9902437016... [2] https://support.google.com/analytics/answer/2763052?hl=en
In HomeBrew Analytics – top 1000 packages installed over last year
woodruffw·Sep 4, 2017
> What's the real cost of just leaving those formula around? Maintenance. When unused and unmaintained projects and formulae pile up in Homebrew, we end up spending a tremendous amount of time and effort patching mostly unused software for a very small part of the userbase. That dis-proportionality hurts the 95% of users who expect timely and well-tested updates to major packages. We used to provide a "boneyard" tap for unused/unmaintained formulae, but even that led to a lot of requests for support that we simply can't provide. If something is being removed from the core tap, our current recommendation is to put it a personal tap[1]. > The culture of deletion surrounding the long tail of digital artifacts just doesn't make any sense. Keep in mind that the "artifacts" in question are still available, since Homebrew and all Homebrew taps a
Read the rest
re just Git underneath. You might not be able to build an old formula for compatibility reasons, but all prior work is available for reference. [1]: https://github.com/Homebrew/brew/blob/master/docs/How-to-Cre...
In HomeBrew Analytics – top 1000 packages installed over last year
woodruffw·Sep 4, 2017
Homebrew maintainer here. That language could probably be more precise - only current maintainers have access to detailed analytics (the details being specified on that same page). I wasn't part of the creation of that particular page, but one thing we (the maintainers) commonly find ourselves doing is publicly referencing install statistics as justification for removing an unused formula or taking extra care during a version bump. Having public statistics for the top 1000 most popular packages makes those considerations a little bit more transparent. Edit: I've created a PR to fix the language: https://github.com/Homebrew/brew/pull/3120
In HomeBrew Analytics – top 1000 packages installed over last year
falcolas·Sep 4, 2017
Homebrew's use of analytics still bothers me; specifically, making data public like this. It was supposed to only be used for development efforts, not showing off top-1000 lists. Also, I guess this following statement is - taking the charitable option - out of date. > Homebrew's analytics are accessible to Homebrew's current maintainers. https://github.com/Homebrew/brew/blob/master/docs/Analytics.... Yeah, I know, my tinfoil hat is quite elaborate. EDIT: Like I said, my tinfoil hat is quite elaborate; I already have analytics and automated updating turned off. I like to retain some control over what information is reported back to Google or other projects. That doesn't somehow boost my confidence in Google and volunteer-run open source projects to properly respect the privacy of their users.
In HomeBrew Analytics – top 1000 packages installed over last year
throwanem·Jul 9, 2017
And aroused considerable controversy, here and elsewhere, when it was new. The two major active discussions here, 7 months and a year ago respectively: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13034936 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11566720 I'm not too terribly fussed over it, especially considering what it must cost to support Homebrew - if analytics data helps the maintainers make more effective choices around how to allocate limited resources, that seems to me like a good goal, and I'm not sure how providing information on packages I've installed via Homebrew, to be included in anonymized reports on packages ~everyone has installed in Homebrew, poses any meaningful risk to me. That said, if you feel otherwise, see https://github.com/Homebrew/brew/blob/master/docs/Analytics.... on how to make Homebrew not send analytics data any more
Read the rest
.
In A JavaScript browser library fails due to an adblocker blacklisting 'beacon.js'
gonyea·Apr 15, 2017
Install a modern Bash and set it as your default shell. When Homebrew updates (which it does automatically now) you might be locked out of your Terminal. `brew --prefix package` returns the latest installable package, and not the version you actually have installed. Also things like: https://github.com/Homebrew/brew/issues/2402 It tries to do too much and ends up being a never ending surprise from hell. (The solution to the Bash issue is to hard code the path for chsh, etc.)
In What the Hackintosh community wants in the new modular Mac Pro
x0x0·Apr 7, 2017
It wasn't presumptuous for Gruber to tell me what I need in a computer? OK then. And I know mxcl works for Apple, but not on homebrew. The lead maintainer works, I think, at GitHub? Edit: in fact, from the commit logs, mxcl doesn't seem to have been much involved in homebrew in years. It's a poor show for github to seemingly be more interested in helping make macs work well for developers rather than Apple, imo... https://github.com/Homebrew/brew/graphs/contributors
In Phil Schiller, Craig Federighi and John Ternus on the State of Apple’s Pro Macs

Showing the 15 most recent of 16 sources. Enable JavaScript to search and browse every indexed mention.

MAKE YOURSELF AT HOME

A few shortcuts

/
Search the collection
?
Open this guide
Esc
Close dialogs and navigation

Your saved repositories and interests stay in this browser.