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

Migrating the main Zig repository from GitHub to Codeberg

ziglang.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 952 posts

Re: Migrating the main Zig repository from GitHub to Codeberg

#151

Post by Waterluvian »

johnfn wrote: post #95

> it’s abundantly clear that the talented folks who used to work on the product have moved on to bigger and better things, with the remaining losers eager to inflict some kind of bloated, buggy JavaScript framework on us in the name of progress. > More importantly, Actions is created by monkeys This writing really does not reflect well on Zig. If you have technical issues with Github, fine: cite them. But leave ad ho…

Yeah this is pretty embarrassing.

I get frustrated with tech all the time! I get it. Grr when Actions feels so irritatingly misbehaved…

But how you handle or fail to handle your frustration demonstrates the competence of your character and speaks volumes of what you’d be like to work with.

Re: Migrating the main Zig repository from GitHub to Codeberg

#153

Post by stratts »

JimmaDaRustla wrote: post #88
newcodebergfan wrote: post #49

Damn - Codeberg is snappy! It's as fast as Github used to be 10 years ago. Server rendered pages. No AJAX-style slow updates. Love it.

Github is backend rendered too...

GitHub seems to be the worst of both worlds - partially rendered on the server, but then the frontend inexplicably pulls in additional data like... commit messages??

It's a double hit of latency, and for bonus points, the commit messages won't load at all if your browser is slightly out of date

Re: Migrating the main Zig repository from GitHub to Codeberg

#154

Post by ssivark »

johnfn wrote: post #95

> it’s abundantly clear that the talented folks who used to work on the product have moved on to bigger and better things, with the remaining losers eager to inflict some kind of bloated, buggy JavaScript framework on us in the name of progress. > More importantly, Actions is created by monkeys This writing really does not reflect well on Zig. If you have technical issues with Github, fine: cite them. But leave ad ho…

> created by monkeys

I don't particularly care for either Zig or Github, but...

they do precisely cite the technical issues. That snippet links to a Github discussion comment https://github.com/actions/runner/issues/3792#issuecomment-3...

(reproduced below)

"The bug in this "safe sleep" script is obvious from looking at it: if the process is not scheduled for the one-second interval in which the loop would return (due to $SECONDS having the correct value), then it simply spins forever. That can easily happen on a CI machine under extreme load. When this happens, it's pretty bad: it completely breaks a runner until manual intervention. On Zig's CI runner machines, we observed multiple of these processes which had been running for hundreds of hours, silently taking down two runner services for weeks."

"I don't understand how we got here. Even ignoring the pretty clear bug, what makes this Bash script "safer" than calling into the POSIX standard sleep utility? It doesn't seem to solve any problem; meanwhile, it's less portable and needlessly eats CPU time by busy-waiting."

"The sloppy coding which is evident here, as well as the inaction on core Actions bugs (in line with the decay in quality of almost every part of GitHub's product), is forcing the Zig project to strongly consider moving away from GitHub Actions entirely. With this bug, and many others (severe workflow scheduling issues resulting in dozens of timeouts; logs randomly becoming inaccessible; random job cancellations without details; perpetually "pending" jobs), we can no longer trust that Actions can be used to implement reliable CI infrastructure. I personally would seriously encourage other projects, particularly any using self-hosted runners, to look carefully at the stability of Actions and ask themselves whether it is a solution worth sticking with long-term when compared with alternatives."

----

I agree that the writing in the blog post is more colorful than precise, but sanitizing every bit of expression dulls the internet. Humans invented language for a reason.

Re: Migrating the main Zig repository from GitHub to Codeberg

#155

Post by countWSS »

Its sad to see people silently supporting Github monopoly. Any migration out of github should be encouraged. Decentalized, open-source systems should always be preferred over corporate walled gardens. Trusting Microsoft never ends well. The amount of infrastructure/projects/etc that stop with github malfunctions and have no fallback or operating mirror git is astounding. Github is eventually going to be enshittified and abandoned, so its fairly wise to spread projects into multiple(not just codeberg) synced mirrors where any server failing doesn't stop progress.

Re: Migrating the main Zig repository from GitHub to Codeberg

#156

Post by vips7L »

andsoitis wrote: post #141
notepad0x90 wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're right, I've been hearing lots of good things about Zig and I wanted to check it out but I'm glad I saw this post. I want no part of this thing. I've heard people call other people "monkeys" before in a work setting. it's never good. Fact is, you don't need to call anyone names or insult them. The takeaway for me is that the Zig project is led by people who are extremely immature and toxic. I simply don't trust…

> I simply don't trust any decision these people make Do you have an example or two of poor decisions that push you away so strongly?

Yes, calling people monkeys is a bad decision.

Re: Migrating the main Zig repository from GitHub to Codeberg

#157

Post by notepad0x90 »

andsoitis wrote: post #141
notepad0x90 wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're right, I've been hearing lots of good things about Zig and I wanted to check it out but I'm glad I saw this post. I want no part of this thing. I've heard people call other people "monkeys" before in a work setting. it's never good. Fact is, you don't need to call anyone names or insult them. The takeaway for me is that the Zig project is led by people who are extremely immature and toxic. I simply don't trust…

> I simply don't trust any decision these people make Do you have an example or two of poor decisions that push you away so strongly?

Clearly, my distrust is based on Andrew's publicly displayed character, not an analysis of historical behavior. When you see a Chef not wash his hands after using a restroom, you should avoid eating at their restaurant, even if you have no proof they don't wash their hands in the kitchen prior to cooking.

The important observation for me is that he didn't know where to draw the line, and this is regarding people he doesn't work with, unknown/random Microsoft employees. Will he cross the line if someone he does know and trust does something he disagrees with? I would like to give him the benefit of the doubt, but the bar is high when it comes to trusted software like programming language compilers.

I wish Zig all the success, but only if it's community and the tech community as a whole can hold it's leadership accountable instead of making excuses and defending him like this. It's ok to tell people you admire and respect they screwed up.

Re: Migrating the main Zig repository from GitHub to Codeberg

#158

Post by kstrauser »

JimmaDaRustla wrote: post #88
newcodebergfan wrote: post #49

Damn - Codeberg is snappy! It's as fast as Github used to be 10 years ago. Server rendered pages. No AJAX-style slow updates. Love it.

Github is backend rendered too...

It was. Open a huge diff in it now and go grab some dinner while your browser tries to render it.

I don’t hate GitHub or anything, but its UI is way slower now than it use to be.

Re: Migrating the main Zig repository from GitHub to Codeberg

#159

Post by conorbergin »

notepad0x90 wrote: post #138
johnfn wrote: post #95

> it’s abundantly clear that the talented folks who used to work on the product have moved on to bigger and better things, with the remaining losers eager to inflict some kind of bloated, buggy JavaScript framework on us in the name of progress. > More importantly, Actions is created by monkeys This writing really does not reflect well on Zig. If you have technical issues with Github, fine: cite them. But leave ad ho…

You're right, I've been hearing lots of good things about Zig and I wanted to check it out but I'm glad I saw this post. I want no part of this thing. I've heard people call other people "monkeys" before in a work setting. it's never good. Fact is, you don't need to call anyone names or insult them. The takeaway for me is that the Zig project is led by people who are extremely immature and toxic. I simply don't trust…

>If you called Netanyahu a monkey because of his Gaza genocide, most people who are pro-palestine will try to cancel you! Not because they think highly of him, but because it hurts the cause more than it helps.

Your reading of the current political climate is very different to mine.

Re: Migrating the main Zig repository from GitHub to Codeberg

#160

Post by healsdata »

bigyabai wrote: post #24
linkage wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Look at the absolute state of what they are working on. If they are not losers, they are dispirited clock-punchers who don't care about their craft.

The absolute state of Github is that I use it dozens of times a day and it works flawlessly, for free, with intermittent outages. Microsoft is doing more with Github than I can say for most of their products. I won't go to bat for the Xbox or Windows teams, but Github is... fine. Almost offensively usable.

> intermittent outages

The outages have gone from "almost every Friday" to "several times per week".

Post reply on HN