You don't need to push for full opensource to be able to contribute. You can negotiate time to help maintain oss packages the company IP relies upon and design your IP around creating agnostic modules that can later be released to the community.
Yes, but GitHub is more than just git. The most important aspect of the platform that everybody seems to forget is the social component and how easy it made to create a persistent, off-site repository and collaborate across repos.
People forget what FOSS is, and you get a world of unclear expectations. FOSS is code + a copyright license. How the code is created is an entirely different matter, and where FOSS projects often fall short. As FOSS projects come Forgejo is well-organized around a community governance model.
Indeed, the fact that maintainers didn't have until only recently the control for disabling Pull Requests tab in a GitHub repo, is what drove a lot of issues in FOSS collaboration over the past decade.
FOSS and open source licenses never ever granted entitlement for contributors to have their proposals reviewed/merged by maintainers. Neither it ever offered entitlement for users to ask for free support.
FOSS is about giving people access to source code so they can do with it whatever they want, and maintainers/authors should have always had the ability to "publish and forget" the source code, without having to deal with those "entitlements".
I assume they are referring to the large number of open source users and developers that are particularly bad at people skills and acting calm and rational.
Or maybe they mean there aren't good collaboration platforms in general, not sure.
> The "social component" is a big problem in actual FOSS.
You're confusing things. The "social component" refers to people interacting with each other. Such as two developers working on a bug or a feature. Or a tester reporting a bug.
This is a big part of actual professional software development work.
IDK, it's hard to criticize the community too much given how wildly, absurdly successful it is. If I arrived on Earth yesterday and you tried to tell me how much software is Free/free in an otherwise-capitalist economy, I wouldn't believe you!
I really really am not trying to start a political argument, but just as food for thought: this is exactly why I have faith in socialism (read: 'prosocial institutions and norms'). And whether socialism is eu- or dys-topian, it certainly cannot happen in the first place without a "social component"!
What on earth is the social component of GitHub? I assume I’m missing what’s useful to people here as it keeps getting brought up, but what is it? Is it the stars on a repo? Are people doing something else big with all of this?
Look, you are the one that opened with "What on earth is the social component of GitHub?". What's the semantic function of that specific construction if not being completely ironic, like you decided I was wrong before engaging?
> if you don’t want to engage don’t
I am engaging, you just don't like that I'm not spelling it out. This is perfectly within the community guidelines.
> Totally different thing
It's just the same thing, you both are ignoring how important convenience is.
I'm not sure how to make it clearer. I do not understand what the "social" component of github is that people are using so heavily that it's a big thing to break from and requires huge centralisation, that it is the "most important aspect of the platform". I said that I assume I am missing something because I don't see much that really ties all these things together, and nothing like the network effects of, say, X or facebook.
All you've pointed to is devs working together and people filing bugs. All that requires is auth, no? Is that it? Is an SSO button really this enormous hurdle?
> It's just the same thing,
Saying dropbox is irrelevant because all end users could just "build such a system yourself quite trivially by getting an FTP account, mounting it locally with curlftpfs, and then using SVN or CVS on the mounted filesystem." is not the same as saying "what is the social aspect of github?".
Closer is what I've argued elsewhere, which is that multiple different hosts running (something like) gitea selling cloud based storage as a service would be extremely close to github for end users. And it would be identical for what you've talked about wouldn't it?
> you both are ignoring how important convenience is.
The convenience of what, specifically? Not having to click an SSO button on a new website?
> All you've pointed to is devs working together and people filing bugs. All that requires is auth, no?
Collaboration is a form of socialization. GitHub made a social network on top of a SVN to create a forge that people can interact with each other creating issues, pull requests, reviewing and commenting on them, engaging in discussions, forking and improving upon each others works... These are not "just auth" and it's not something git solves by itself. I really don't know how to make this clearer either, sorry. Maybe it's this is the kind of thing that you see it and you get it or you don't, I don't know. For me and apparently for lots of people in this thread that makes sense.
I know git doesn't do this by itself, but then we're not talking about github vs raw git - perhaps that's where you're confused by what I'm saying.
All these other services have what you're talking about, and the only cross-repo/org work I can see here is:
* Aligned accounts (person X on one service is person Y on github), if you want that continuity across services
* Forking
And the whole forking/branching/merging side is handled by raw git.
That's why I've been asking what githubs huge centralisation gets us. It has a UI and features that are useful, great, those exist in other projects too, so what is the stickiness?
Before everyone started plopping their one-off AI bullshit[†] onto Github 40 times per day, I used to love going to Github's homepage feed to see what people I follow were interacting with on Github (contributing to, forking, opening issues on, and yes, starring). It was a great way to discover new projects and tech that I might want to use. I'd found many open source dotnet packages that way, which made their way into my projects' dependencies. I've sponsored some and contributed to others as well, all thanks to Github's discovery.
[†] I occasionally have AI write one-off bullshit too, so I'm not casting stones. It's just overwhelmed the discovery signal with noise.
Honest question, why a shock to the hippies? In 69 less than a decade before there was Woodstock and the music, while not futuristic, was very progressive and innovative. All in all I think these folks might have had more to do with the hippies than anyone else at the time, specially in a time right after the world war, with the extreme anti-fascist sentiment in the country.
The sound of Autobahn was so different than anything else in the air, that it came as a shock to everyone.
Even if you point out other synth-pop songs ("Popcorn" would be the most obvioous) of the era, Autobahn just doesn't sound anything like them. The biggest reason is that it doesn't work very hard at all to be a song. While there were plenty of people in that era who were not making "songs" (hey, prog rock, we love you!), their approach to that quest was entirely different.
Security and authorization is just hard and at one point if you are designing a platform you have to ask yourself if it's worth the risk for the sake of flexibility. To plan for a perfectly safe system is a hopeless proposition.
It's the 35MB wasm, plus the browser runtime, the OS graphical session and the kernel runtime. Docker images are MB because they pack the distro overlay, not because it's unreasonably unoptimized as the clickbaity title suggests.
Docker doesn’t even need a whole OS overlay if your project doesn’t call for it. It’s pretty easy to take a Go app for example and just include it in a scratch container.
If you change `how=up` to `how=down` it downvotes the post.
I tried it once, didn't change the vote count, but I issued the inverse operation with `how=un` and the vote count went up, so I'm guessing someone upvoted at the same time I downvoted. That or it doesn't really work like it says it does, but it does respond with a 301 followed by an OK, so I think this works.
I tried this and had no change with either down or the subsequent un, using my own upvote link's token.
Perhaps someone coincidentally upvoted the post at the same time you attempted to undown the submission, rather than upvoting when you attemped to downvote it.
Get 10 black market cats for free, now 11 cats own you for a total net worth of 11X.
That's even before considering the compound effect of each cat owning a human worth 11X, which means you can divest from 1 cat for 11X, and still be worth 110*X.
The system basically works like xAI shares. Don't look too close into it.
There you go, here are your 1,000 shares for $0.0001.
Everybody! Pay attention now! Only 22,999,000 share tokens are left, and due to gchamonlive's massive transaction, the liquidity pool is moving fast, and a share/token is now worth $150,000. Don't miss out, act now!
reply