Would you be willing to consider sharing the substance source files on your site as well? I've been learning material design off and on for a while now and the ability to learn from and modify them would be cool, but obviously not required if that's too much effort or just not something you'd want to share.
Either way, thanks a lot for the resource, stuff like this always gets me excited!
I'm not planning to share them because they are so complicated and need to be edited and standardized one by one. I'm focused on creating scanned assets right now.
The replying comment side stepped the discussion of error messages lacking context that could be easily remedied to be identifiable and the response was "it's in the manual". All error messages meant to be understood by humans should be in the manual at minimum, but what the replyer suggested by ignoring the conversation was "your issue with the error message isn't important because you can figure it out yourself". It's dismissive to respond to nuanced articulated opinions made in good faith with simplistic matter-of-fact answers that don't address the problem, which could easily be seen as a form of hostility in a place meant for discussion and engagement.
You could argue that's not their intent or that it's the case of direct wording than intentionally being curt, but this is the second post in the chain that dismisses the legitimate discussion with additional redress to make sure you let the poster know that it's their problem "punching at shadows" and that their problems are imagined. What a shameful display of lacking empathy.
It's not important because there are many quirks to this software, including a Lisp-like programming language. Learning to use it involves internalising many things that aren't common knowledge, which one has to figure out by trial and error, and the manual.
If you are seriously interested in BeeBase you'll be spending hours learning the basics of the Lisp-dialect and GUI toolkit, getting a hangup on that error message means you don't have that kind of interest. Maybe the empathy got in the way of that, I don't know.
And let's say someone makes a patch that implements a new error message that specifies which of the two rules regarding table names has been breached, then what? More complaints about the next quirk? Some other error message? Begging for a Lua-implemented query language because parens lost the syntax wars of yesteryear, describing it as miserable that it isn't already integrated?
> And let's say someone makes a patch that implements a new error message that specifies which of the two rules regarding table names has been breached, then what? More complaints about the next quirk? Some other error message?
Yes, this is how software development is done, assuming you like your customers.
I was quoting you, using the > sign to refer to what you said directly. I thought the quote was useful to highlight that it can be easy to have a mental disconnect, or even an antagonism, between developers and their stakeholders.
The people who use the software of the people who write the software. If the word "customers" is triggering, the argument holds just as well as for "users".
Why are you dodging the question? Who are you talking about, and why?
It's not the commenters above that complained about the error message, they aren't users and highly unlikely to ever become users. Instead you've brought in some unspecified other for unspecified reasons.
Yeah there’s a lot of people mistaking bluntness for hostility here.
And, at the end of the day, this is a free open source piece of software. The experience could be improved, definitely, but nobody owes it to anyone to do so and it’s important to remember that as well.
This is their personal notes on installing Endeavour in their environment. They're likely dual-booting and Windows time gets screwed up without that registry key due to differences in how Windows and Linux store system time.
I'll never understand why a language needs to constantly evolve to be popular. There's nothing fun about having to keep up with changes, and continuous development just screams to me that a project has not yet matured. When something is stable enough to just keep working for 10 years without an update, that's not a bad thing. When did that become the mindset?
Git is already decentralized. So no, we don't need a fediverse equivalent. Crazy idea, but what if you hosted your code on your infrastructure, like the "old days"? Or, move to an independent forge, or stay where you are. The concern isn't about GitHub directly, but that everyone storing all their source code in one place is concerning.
Git is flexible. I'm kind of surprised at how ubiquitous GitHub is given how easy it is to host your own repositories and set up a mailing list to accept patches and discussion on.
Self hosting is painful and not a real solution for most people. Mailing list also have terrible UX. I'd rather risk Github nuking all of my 50 or so repos than work over a mailing list.
As much as I love doing things myself, the reality is that I spend wayyyy more time doing things myself than I save, and time is my main constraint. Getting booted off of GitHub would be a pretty minor inconvenience compared to the time sink of doing it myself, especially if I botch something and lose data.
> Git is flexible. I'm kind of surprised at how ubiquitous GitHub is given how easy it is to host your own repositories and set up a mailing list to accept patches and discussion on.
The UX you're proposing is far worse than what GitHub provides for less effort, and anyway GitHub isn't just "repo hosting + code review", you also get web hooks, CI, user/org management, code search (such as it is), a web interface (as well as mobile app), etc. And you don't have to teach people how to use it effectively.
I feel a need to point out that a force of armed men pointing guns at you with their fingers on the trigger is very much a deeply traumatizing and frightening thing to go through. We also have occurrences of swatting incidents leading to the deaths of innocents (links below). I also want to add that during a swatting incident, having your dog shot on sight isn't irregular, as they are considered a threat while sweeping through your home.
