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

391–400 of 952 posts

Re: Migrating the main Zig repository from GitHub to Codeberg

#391

Post by sundarurfriend »

sundarurfriend wrote: post #382
mikelitoris wrote: post #252

Earlier quoted context omitted.

oh god... he has a humongous AI generated PR for julia too https://github.com/tshort/StaticCompiler.jl/pull/180

More context/discussion on this: https://discourse.julialang.org/t/ai-generated-enhancements-... (Honestly, that's a lot more patience than I'd be able to give what are mostly AI-generated replies, so kudos to these folk.)

As an aside, he originally titled the thread "A complete guide to building static binaries with Julia (updated for 1.12)", with no mention of AI. That got me excited every time I opened the Discourse, until I remembered it was this slop. :/

Re: Migrating the main Zig repository from GitHub to Codeberg

#392

Post by michaelanckaert »

yoyohello13 wrote: post #6
bitbasher wrote: post #2

I'm happy to see the move. Codeberg is probably a more stable/long-term solution than SourceHut as the founder is slightly unhinged (but love what he has built). Honestly, either would have been great choices. More opensource projects should move off GitHub. I moved off it myself.

I’m pretty sure Drew has stepped away from SourceHut. It’s kind of a bummer SourceHut stuck so stubbornly to mailing list only workflows. Everything else about the platform is great.

I agree that there is a steep learning curve compared to Github pull requests or Gitlab merge requests, but like many things the steep learning curve actually hides a very powerful tool. A famous example is the Linux Kernel, a project of such a size that simply can not work with the Github/Gitlab model.

Re: Migrating the main Zig repository from GitHub to Codeberg

#393

Post by ImHereToVote »

oaiey wrote: post #285
ssivark wrote: post #215

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Would you perhaps have preferred if they referred to it as "unprofessional" or "sloppy" instead alluding of monkeys? To me all those mean the same thing, except the latter is more flavorful and makes my eyes less likely to glaze over. > Imagine how you would feel if you were the person who wrote this code, and now you are being called a monkey in front of thousands of people on the internet. Er.. so? Why should anyon…

Not everyone is build robust enough for being called a monkey or loser straight into the person's face.

Maybe they would be happier working a job that requires zero accountability.

Re: Migrating the main Zig repository from GitHub to Codeberg

#394

Post by wmanley »

magicalhippo wrote: post #311
nh2 wrote: post #262

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is still not a proper fix. It is still busy-looping 100% CPU. Given that Github Actions is quite popular, probably wasting large amount of energy. But probably good at generating billable Actions minutes. One can only hope that not many people use sleeps to handle their CI race conditions, as that itself is also not a proper fix.

Clearly the job for a microservice. Accept number of seconds to wait as url, return content after that many seconds. Then just use curl in runner.

Retries won’t work in that case. Would be better to have two endpoints: get the time in x seconds and wait until time passed. That way retrying the wait endpoint will work fine and if time hasn’t elapsed it can just curl itself with the same arguments.

Re: Migrating the main Zig repository from GitHub to Codeberg

#395

Post by [deleted] »

leo_e wrote: post #91

To see this just as a hosting switch misses the bigger picture. This is the logical infrastructure conclusion of Zig's 'Zero Dependency' philosophy. Zig spent years removing dependencies on the system C compiler (zig cc), removing dependencies on libc, and is currently working to remove the dependency on LLVM (the self-hosted backend). GitHub was just another dependency. For a project obsessed with reproducibility an…

[deleted]

Re: Migrating the main Zig repository from GitHub to Codeberg

#396

Post by majkinetor »

oaiey wrote: post #288
MarcelOlsz wrote: post #196

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it's a breath of fresh air. Don't want to be called out like this then stop fucking up.

Not everyone is that robust. People get hurt over things like that. Not everyone is a wizard who does not give a fuck and does not need to care. These are people for God's sake. Empathy!

Treating grown up people like little kids is a major problem. If that was a stressor which requires defensive actions such as this one, what are you good for in life?

Re: Migrating the main Zig repository from GitHub to Codeberg

#398

Post by MaxfordAndSons »

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…

It doesn't reflect well, but also, is it not fairly par for the course from a BDFL type? Surely Linus Torvalds has said meaner things at some point on a listserv. Why does this guy get blasted for it? Because people still have generally positive sentiment towards Github? Just a day or 2 ago some other article was making similarly "ad hominem" attacks towards anonymous Youtube PMs, it got tons of upvotes and nobody clutched their pearls for the poor PMs. The Github/MS engineers who maintain actions (whose poor performance probably isn't even the result of any single individuals bad code), will be fine.

Seems like the HN mob is just as capricious as the author in deciding who gets as pass or not.

Re: Migrating the main Zig repository from GitHub to Codeberg

#399

Post by gethly »

ttiurani wrote: post #352

Looking at these comments, it's painfully apparent how many think that being polite in your communication is more important than actually doing something. I agree it would have been nicer if the message was more polite. But if you compare that to having the backbone follow through with meaningful long-term changes against a corporation you don't trust or respect, there shouldn't even be a discussion. And don't even g…

> it's painfully apparent how many think that being polite in your communication is more important than actually doing something

I absolutely agree, but people in charge of large projects/groups, in any context, should know better than to put their personal feelings and opinion on topics into the "corporate" messages they are putting out. I am guilty of this myself, no one is holier than thou, but still. AK should know better.

Post reply on HN