technom

@technom@programming.dev

This profile is from a federated server and may be incomplete. For a complete list of posts, browse on the original instance.

technom ,

I thought IBM was still stuck with Watson. Have they moved on?

technom ,

The problem is that all of those interdependent parts and software that are dependent on it become entrenched. There is no freedom to replace individual parts with an alternative because something else will break. That's what I call 'Modular in theory, monolithic in practice'.

technom ,

A random one every month.

technom ,

Commonmark leaves some stuff like tables unspecified. That creates the need for another layer like GFM or mistletoe. Standardization is not a strong point for markdown.

technom ,

Asciidoc is a good example of why everything should be standardized. While markdown has multiple implementations, any document is tied to just one implementation. Asciidoc has just one implementation. But when the standard is ready, you should be able to switch implementations seamlessly.

technom ,

I don't think that this is a hard rule. They probably look for the same signs that we do - plausible sounding utter gibberish. They just don't want the drop in quality due to that. If an author creates content with AI, but takes their time to edit and improve it, I think that the Gentoo team may give it a pass.

technom ,

The story behind git is very dramatic. You should read it.

technom ,

That was only a very rough version. His original plan was to use it as a backend for other VCS. Torvalds handed over the maintainership of the project to Junio Hamano after about 4 months. Much of what we know today as git are contributions from him and others.

None of this is to say that Torvalds didn't invent it. He invented the content addressed object storage format. But it's important to understand the actual history of git's evolution.

technom ,

The egregious part in this is that Google presents RCS as an open standard to get carriers to adopt it. But then they retain enough control to exert their power over users like this. The same happened with Android. I don't know how long such exploitation is tolerated before such aggressors are split up into a thousand competing businesses.

technom ,

Another aha moment was learning that an easy way to squash commits is just to do a git reset followed by git commit -am “whatever”

You can do that in a single step instead with git commit -a --amend.

technom ,

possibly several parents, like 8 parents

Fun fact. Such merges with more than 2 parents are called 'octopus merges'. The Linux repo has a single merge with 66 parents that Torvalds named the 'Cthulhu merge'.

Git never deletes a commit that is less than 90 days old.

On its own, that is. Not if you do a git gc.

Deleting a branch removes a reference to a commit, but the commits in the branch are still there.

but you can see them using “reflog” related commands

Reflog - one of the most underrated git commands that has the potential to save your life some day. At least one team member must learn it.

technom ,

That blame must go to github. Not Torvalds.

technom , (edited )

You never reach a phase when you can confidently say that you understand git. But it's certainly possible to go from "When something goes wrong, I just delete the repo and clone it again" to "Aha! Now I can deal with most of the issues".

Mine was when I realized that git commands come in two flavors. Those that deal with commits as snapshots (commit, checkout, switch, reset, etc) and those that deal with commits as changes/diffs/deltas (merge, rebase, cherrypick, revert, etc). (Note: This isn't about how git stores commits on disk). I believe that this is actually the main source of confusion for beginner and intermediate git users.

technom , (edited )

A big group of Apple fanbase are not ignorant, rather willing accomplices. Just look at the downvotes here. They will do anything to defend Apple's rogue behavior - like resorting to whataboutery, blaming the EU or even claiming that PWAs are bad.

My theory is that by defending Apple, they're trying to make themselves feel important with their overpriced products.

technom ,

I always say this - you're underestimating the size of the Apple fanboi crowd. They're ready to defend any crap Apple pulls on them.

technom ,

Same with Reddit. They are now selling user data happily after their entire userbase revolted. Now nobody has a problem.

technom ,

How about YouTube? Video dislikes were a reliable indicator as to which videos to avoid. Now it's full of shitty clickbaits like 'NASA lied'. What was their excuse again?

technom ,

Looks like a good set of advice.

technom ,

The proper way to organize a branch is as a logical sequence of sub-features - each represented by a commit. Ideally, the commits should not break the build while introducing its feature. In many such cases, each commit may have a back story - the tests you did, your decision process, online references (that apply only to that commit - something like stackoverflow answers), etc.

Branch messages don't have the fidelity to capture such information. You may question the need for such detailed info. However, along with git blame and bisect, those commit messages are invaluable. I have lost count of how many times my own detailed commit messages helped me. And while I don't usually look at others' commits in such detail, I do read the details of commits that I'm interested in.

Git (and other VCSs) isn't just a snapshot tool. It's a history tool with the ability to capture history documentation. Honestly, Git is extremely underutilized in that capacity.

technom ,

It's still missing the send and receive features from btrfs. And while they say it's more stable than btrfs, it's yet to prove itself (through widespread use), and is marked as experimental in the kernel config.

technom ,

Until you start seeing its reviews. Or else, you should try using it for data you can afford to lose (unimportant or backed up) - which is what reviewers would be doing anyway.

technom ,

Is there an article I can refer to? This isn't an easy topic to search for.

technom ,

Why just Google? Search has gone into the gutter across the board. Certain search constraints like excluding keywords or sites no longer work. Amazon doesn't even care what you type in - they just show you what they want you to buy.

technom ,

Just dump Google's browser and all their services. They are not necessary to make use of the internet.

technom ,

Here's one issue they hope to solve with this rewrite: https://github.com/fish-shell/fish-shell/issues/238

technom ,

Torvalds indicated in a recent interview that they're struggling to find young maintainers. Many people contribute, but few stay around to become proficient enough and take on the responsibility of maintainership. I believe that the email comment was made in this context.

However, I don't think that many kernel devs including Torvalds are in favour of the Github workflow. He once indicated his strong dislike for it. So the replacement for email won't be Github - but something just as easy, without sacrificing the quality that the kernel devs need.

Finally, a word is kernel development. Contrary to popular belief, they aren't hostile to new contributors. Kernel developers have high quality intro material for newbies - including for email workflow. They're also very considerate and patient with newbies. Even Torvalds who was known for his abrasive style in the past really took that only on experienced developers doing the wrong thing.

technom ,

Mailing lists aren't that hard if you have the right tools. For most people, it's just a few lines of configuration. But there are a lot of hidden tools for emails that you simply don't get with PR workflow. You'll get very attached to them once you start. That's the reason why many kernel devs are so attached to emails.

technom ,

I’m curious, what tools are you talking about?

My fav ones are b4 and lei - both backed by a system called public-inbox. Linux kernel Lore is a public-inbox instance. There are other tools too - like patchwork. B4 and Lei, for example make working with patch series a breeze. You can also do things like compare different versions of the same branch - something that Github PR model is sorely lacking in.

What is happening here? Where is the patch?

That's what public-inbox and patchwork are for. Lei is especially useful with public-inboxes. If you are a bit more established, there are tools like notmuch and aerc that can make it even more easier.

Is each email a commit?

Yes, that's the idea. But more specifically, each email is a patch. Usually, a single patch is a refined commit with a full feature that you get after proper rebasing to weed out experimental code, mistakes, etc. A single submission is often just one or a handful of patches.

Where at the comments on the patch?

You don't deal with patches and emails manually that deep. You only need to have a rough awareness of the location of the patches (lei, notmuch, etc help you with this awareness). Code review mails and discussion mails are often threaded and intertwined with a series of patches. Threading actually helps you to follow the correct flow of discussion. Think of mailing lists as PR, Issue tracker and discussion forum rolled into one. You wont be hunting patches in this haystack. That's the job of the tools - they extract the correct series of patches in the right order, ready to be applied. Some can even alert you to the presence of newer revisions of the patch series. (I'm not even sure how far this goes - I haven't tried patchwork yet). There is actually a lot of automation involved.

but mailinglists are even worse

Even if they decided to keep mailinglists, they could at least put on a better UI

Frankly, here is the problem! All the other problems you mentioned boils down to this. The thing is - Github and Mailing lists deal with the same kind of data - with the latter being more transparent. But the mailing list interfaces are god-damn awful. But honestly, it doesn't have to be like that. I believe that with some proper UI design, mailing lists can offer an experience that's at par or even better than GH PRs. All the noise and clutter you mentioned doesn't need to be there. The tools make all the difference. Webmail clients like Gmail just butcher the mails. But it's already much better when you have a text-only threaded mail client. I believe people hate email workflow just because of how badly its interface is designed.

technom ,

I thought it was a one-time payment.

technom ,

I mean, if it's a one time payment then he has no reasons to regret the decision even if the users dropped off. On the other hand, if he was expecting a recurring royalty from the buyer, then he didn't think it through.

PS: I'm not justifying his actions in any manner. If a sale without a heads up is deceptive, his last reply was outright indignation. I'm just trying to understand whether he actually regretted it or not.

technom ,

The newer FOSS projects have a preference for permissive licenses like MIT. That's due to a narrative going around that copyleft licenses like GPL are somehow 'less free'. Apparently, GPL etc are not free enough that companies avoid such projects. And if you want your project to be adopted, you have to avoid these licenses. You can easily guess who is behind such narratives and why.

technom ,

I don't completely agree with many of RMS' stances on sexual abuse. It often feels like he is a bit tone deaf in that regard. However, the cancel campaign against him was very much motivated and they twisted his words completely out of context in several cases. I'm not going to get into the tiresome argument of if he was right or not. But one thing I noticed back then was that many involved in the campaign had clear vested and conflicting interests with undisclosed financial motives. Watching it live, it was pretty clear that the campaign was sponsored by certain big names in the industry.

The anti-FSF campaign you mentioned and the anti-copyleft propaganda I mentioned shouldn't be seen in isolation. It might sound like a conspiracy theory, but there were clear indications of a long term corporate-funded smear campaign to attack the foundations of FOSS - a hit job, if you will. Too bad I didn't bother to save those back then. A lot of illuminating messages were forcefully deleted.

They really took advantage of the outrage mentality of common people. Meanwhile, people took the bait and went after the small fish while being completely oblivious to the big sharks feeding the outrage.

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • •
  • random
  • test
  • worldmews
  • mews
  • All magazines
    •