Why not Conan (part II)?
summary
Five concrete objections repeat and then reverse: building from source is better, supporting multiple build systems is painful in practice, and no public metrics let one compare alternatives; Conan’s acquisition by JFrog raises supply‑chain trust questions; a hacked internal analytics claim reveals hundreds of companies using Conan so mainstream adoption is real; the package manager is built and working, eliciting happy 1.0 releases and laughter about its success.
AI-written summary · about
chapters (4)
- 0:00Start
- 0:17Because building from source is better
- 0:44Because supporting multiple build systems is suboptimal
- 1:37Because it has been acquired by JFrog
related talks
01h 04mWhat's New in Conan 2.0 C/C++ Package Manager
08mThe need for a package manager interface
07mThe case for Vendored Builds
47mIt's all in the delivery
59mCase For a Standardized Package Description Format for External C++ Libraries
27mHow to (not) introduce Rust at your workplace - a tale
29mPerformance: We're In This Together
38mHow I Convinced the World's Largest Package Manager to Use Rust, and So Can You!