95
submitted 2 weeks ago by sith@lemmy.zip to c/opensource@lemmy.ml
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] logging_strict@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Wait? Are we pretending the corps are actually the FOSS devs?

A Corp dev, aka a FOSS dev forced into societal job creation servitude making throw away smartphone apps, web sites, and now AI models.

Gets paid to not be a productive person. Is essential what a societal job creation program is. Actually accomplishing anything is a random flaw and not the intent of employing devs.

The alternative would be to fund the dev to concentrate on maintenance efforts of their repos which the entire world depends on.

And if you don't believe me, just explain one thing. What's the pip-tools maintainer up to? Cuz it's definitely not focused on pip-tools maintenance

Would definitely be interested to check in daily to watch what he's doing. Can throw parties to watch some of the most influential and important people on the planet do the equivalent of digging ditches, refilling them, then doing it again.

[-] MITM0@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago

I tried talking to them about the notion of breaking the monopoly of GIT & was talking about Fossil They literally went don't care "Git is good enough" they're literally talentless monkeys

[-] logging_strict@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 week ago

There is efforts to make the issues and PRs forkable as well. There is some folks jumping ship. Haven't researched the new platforms like codeberg

Codeberg is based in Germany hmmm

gitea docs

[-] MITM0@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

I wasn't talking about Github, I was talking about GIT itself; Look at these Three:

  1. Fossil
  2. Pijul
  3. Darcs

The last 2 are Patch-Based & 2 is basically a modernized-version of 3, eventhough 3 is still being maintained to this day & 1 is a fully-fledged Github-in-a-box

Oh boy I can't wait for the negative comments about it's obviois flaws, so let's hear it

[-] logging_strict@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 week ago

Have read thru the Fossil web site. Fossil and git are nothing alike. Fossil is not Github in a box. That's misleading.

It's ok to place the key/value pairs merkle tree into an sqllite database AND NOT change the philosophy away from what we are used to with git.

Fossil makes me more sold on git. I want the PRs, i want to be able to rebase. I want to be able to fork projects away from it's parent.

Fossil needs to rewrite if it wants to attract git users. My main thing is portability of PRs and Issues. So when fork a project, the PRs and Issues are also forked. When the original author disappears would be nice to not have to rename the repo, while losing the PRs and Issues.

[-] MITM0@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago

But it doesn't appeal to GIT users, Git favours a Bazaar style development

this post was submitted on 11 Dec 2024
95 points (97.0% liked)

Open Source

31723 readers
141 users here now

All about open source! Feel free to ask questions, and share news, and interesting stuff!

Useful Links

Rules

Related Communities

Community icon from opensource.org, but we are not affiliated with them.

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS