Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

RMS: GitHub has done terrible harm to our community

lists.gnu.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 126 posts

Re: RMS: GitHub has done terrible harm to our community

#31

Post by andrewxdiamond »

sergiotapia wrote: post #16
wichert wrote: post #7

There is some awful stuff in that thread, like this gem [1]: After microsoft puchased Github, they encouraged "Codes of Conduct". So now 40k "opensource projects" hace CoC's. Obviously men won't be contributing to said projects, other than the people allready in them. [1] https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/gnu-system-discuss/2019-1...

Obviously it's hyperbole - but a lot of people are definitely put off by coc, myself included. It's a wretched, insidious text sneaked in by very bad actors into mainstream open source repositories.

I find that just being a normal, friendly person is enough to satisfy most, if not all CoCs. I've never had to read one, and I've never been in a situation where I was in violation of one.

Re: RMS: GitHub has done terrible harm to our community

#32

Post by rimliu »

pearjuice wrote: post #26
lgierth wrote: post #4

RMS has done terrible harm to our community

Without RMS most of the software you are currently using wouldn't work. He has orthodox manners and is an extremist for freedom but "terrible harm" is a lie.

I am sure it would work just fine.

Re: RMS: GitHub has done terrible harm to our community

#33

Post by pdonis »

elcaminocomplex wrote: post #21
sergiotapia wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Obviously it's hyperbole - but a lot of people are definitely put off by coc, myself included. It's a wretched, insidious text sneaked in by very bad actors into mainstream open source repositories.

The great thing about CoC is that they tend to be self-reinforcing, keeping out exactly the people who are bound to conduct themselves in ways that are inconsistent with the principles behind them.

This rosy vision depends on everyone being reasonable and using common sense and a presumption of good faith when applying the CoC.

However, many of the people who are pushing for CoC in projects do not themselves meet these requirements.

Re: RMS: GitHub has done terrible harm to our community

#35

Post by andrewxdiamond »

ZiiS wrote: post #30
blihp wrote: post #3

Is his comment based on outdated information? I just checked and github appears to recognize a few dozen ( https://help.github.com/en/github/creating-cloning-and-archi... ) license types including gpl2, gpl3 and lgpl

He makes what I consider a valid point that a license should be compulsory or if missing more clearly highlighted. He also makes a point that you cannot select "GPLv3 or latter" which is the licence GNU recommends.

But you can still use any license you want. The ones he's talking about are just sugestions by github, but you can put anything you want in that ./LICENSE file

Re: RMS: GitHub has done terrible harm to our community

#36

Post by Godel_unicode »

sergiotapia wrote: post #27
elcaminocomplex wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The great thing about CoC is that they tend to be self-reinforcing, keeping out exactly the people who are bound to conduct themselves in ways that are inconsistent with the principles behind them.

before coc was snuck into these repos, was it just a shitshow of nasty people acting a fool in open source communities? I don't remember it that way.

I recommend you Google the name Linus Torvalds. You will find some truly shocking language directed at his fellow human beings.

Re: RMS: GitHub has done terrible harm to our community

#37

Post by dbdjfjrjvebd »

wichert wrote: post #7

There is some awful stuff in that thread, like this gem [1]: After microsoft puchased Github, they encouraged "Codes of Conduct". So now 40k "opensource projects" hace CoC's. Obviously men won't be contributing to said projects, other than the people allready in them. [1] https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/gnu-system-discuss/2019-1...

We won't. You can't force me to contribute to your project and if it has such a coc I just won't.

Re: RMS: GitHub has done terrible harm to our community

#38

Post by vertex-four »

sergiotapia wrote: post #27
elcaminocomplex wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The great thing about CoC is that they tend to be self-reinforcing, keeping out exactly the people who are bound to conduct themselves in ways that are inconsistent with the principles behind them.

before coc was snuck into these repos, was it just a shitshow of nasty people acting a fool in open source communities? I don't remember it that way.

Before codes of conduct, it was reasonably common for misogynistic men to get away with poor behaviour towards women in their communities “because they write good code”. I’ve suffered this directly, so have others I’m close to.

Re: RMS: GitHub has done terrible harm to our community

#39

Post by madiathomas »

GitHub probably did more good for the FOSS community than any other project I can think of. Before GitHub, it was so difficult to share code. Solutions available weren't anywhere close. I don't understand why he wants every little piece of software to be open sourced. GitHub was attractive to investors because it had closed source projects that have to pay in order to use it. I don't see how GitHub was going to succeed if they were purely open source and no-one was paying to use it. Those proprietary projects that he so hates are the ones who were keeping the lights on. They are the ones which were giving Investors hope than GitHub will make lots of money in future and they must invest more.

Re: RMS: GitHub has done terrible harm to our community

#40

Post by thundergolfer »

dbdjfjrjvebd wrote: post #37
wichert wrote: post #7

There is some awful stuff in that thread, like this gem [1]: After microsoft puchased Github, they encouraged "Codes of Conduct". So now 40k "opensource projects" hace CoC's. Obviously men won't be contributing to said projects, other than the people allready in them. [1] https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/gnu-system-discuss/2019-1...

We won't. You can't force me to contribute to your project and if it has such a coc I just won't.

? I'm very confused. "coc" is a "Code of Conduct" document right?

How is that you're opposed to CoC _in general_?

Post reply on HN