[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Bug#834756: ITP: powershell -- scripting language interpreter built on .NET

On Thu, Aug 18, 2016 at 12:17 PM, Marcin Kulisz <debian@kulisz.net> wrote:
> On 2016-08-18 16:27:23, Luke W Faraone wrote:
>> Package: wnpp
>> Severity: wishlist
>> Owner: Luke W Faraone <lfaraone@debian.org>
>> * Package name    : powershell
>>   Version         : 6.0.0~alpha9
>>   Upstream Author : Microsoft
>> * URL             : https://github.com/PowerShell/PowerShell
>> * License         : Expat
>>   Programming Lang: C#
>>   Description     : scripting language interpreter built on .NET

Heh... ya' know what... I can recall a time when I had to scramble to
figure out how to deploy a windows system in a particular environment
so that I had Windows available so that I could load up a powershell
script. In typical Windows fashion, the effort it took me to deal with
the "enhanced security features" windows provides was quite
frustrating, on top of having to find a way to run some queries to
grant myself domain admin rights because 20,000 people were impacted
and people didn't think it was a problem worth staying late for.
Anyway, if I could have run "aptitude install powershell" and run the
queries directly against our problem child from my debian workstation,
well... that'd have been quite swell, pardon my language.

As a Debian guy that gets cranky outside of *nix-land, I think
powershell is a pile of garbage, but I've been in positions where
having it in the repos would have been like a gift from god delivered
on a silver/gold platter.

Side note... I'm actually incredibly impressed that microsoft released
powershell with such a free and open license. I don't get the
impression this is actually the powershell-in-windows source. I get
the impression it's just a portion, but... whatever. It also seems
like it's sort of a trial to see if they want to continue open
sourcing MS SQL (I don't think they did, yet...). I've cried a few
times in meetings where they decide that's the DB of choice. Why?
MariaDB is just so much nicer and easier and has support and
dummy-proof docs... anyway, I would have been much less frustrated at
the decision if aptitude install mssql-server were a thing. I can
still deploy that with a config management system! :D

Reply to: