What would/could be a basis for seeing if the feature is desired by people in the community? I ask because I would be happy to do the legwork to find out, such as contacting leading brew users and developers to see if an option is reasonable, if you and your team could be open to accepting it. With a command line option, the majority users can use brew as always, and the minority power users can gain capabilities for automation and security. That's a personal preference that I do not see any basis for believing is a majority one. I like to choose security sometimes (such as nightly unattended upgrades on a stable macOS) and developer setup sometimes (such as when I'm hands on keyboard on a macOS beta release). This is why I like the idea of a command line option. What would/could help you accept a PR that does this?Īutomated upgrades may help security but they also will break developer setups To be more explicit: even if someone were to implement this perfectly I'm not sure if we would accept the PR.Įven if someone were to implement this perfectly I'm not sure if we would accept the PR. That's very kind of you to offer a financial incentive but it's not about the money but about the widespread need for a feature. If a coder responds to this issue and writes code that's accepted into brew, then I'll donate $100 to the coder, or to their favorite charity. If it's ok with you, I can offer a bounty. We don't keep feature issues open that we do not plan to work on or accept pull requests for. As I've mentioned earlier: this also isn't about automated upgrades but your desire to not run automated upgrades that require sudo that's a personal preference that I do not see any basis for believing is a majority one. I believe this exact use-case can help many users, and can help worldwide security on macOS systemsĪutomated upgrades may help security but they also will break developer setups so this is not something that would be widely accepted. I just want to skip anything that needs sudo.)Įdit 2: Clarify that when I write brew install above, I also mean brew cask install. I do not want sudo to have a longer timeout. I understand why sudo is necessary for some packages. #1293 (That issue seems to focus more on whether sudo is necessary at all, or can be done one time up front, or can use a longer timeout - these areas are not what I'm asking about in this issue. Make brew fetch able to behave as a sort of fallback, such that brew upgrade, brew install, and brew cask install can proceed with downloading a sudo-necessary package, so the package is available locally for whenever I have time to do sudo.Įdit 1: I found a related issue that doesn't seem to have any solution yet. Make brew install and brew cask install behave similarly. The goal: I want to run a nightly brew upgrade, unattended, and have the upgrade do as much as possible, without stopping for a password. The problem: there doesn't seem to be a way to tell brew to upgrade as much as possible unattended this makes it difficult to automate brew. The rest of the upgrade does not proceed. The symptom: run brew upgrade and it upgrades many packages, but if a package needs sudo, then the entire upgrade stops, and prompts the user to type in the sudo password.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |