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

631–640 of 952 posts

Re: Migrating the main Zig repository from GitHub to Codeberg

#631

Post by joelreymont »

VMG wrote: post #624
forgotpwd16 wrote: post #549

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The biggest mistake, AI or not, is dropping a 10K+ PR. 300~500 LOC is how far one should be going, unless they're doing some automated refactoring. E.g. formatting the entire StaticCompiler.jl source. This should've been a distinct PR, preferably by a maintainer.

I've seen this in other places as well. The bottleneck is not coding or creating a PR, the bottleneck is the review.

This ought to be automated using AI.

It could first judge whether the PR is frivolous, then try to review it, then flag a human if necessary.

The problem is that Github, or whatever system hosts the process, should actively prevent projects from being DDOS-ed with PR reviews since using AI costs real money.

Re: Migrating the main Zig repository from GitHub to Codeberg

#632

Post by tcfhgj »

zdragnar wrote: post #613
jenadine wrote: post #561

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's why the article put that reason aside

It could have done an even better job of putting it aside by not even mentioning it at all. Instead we're all sitting here talking about it instead of the technical reasons.

Which is totally fine

Re: Migrating the main Zig repository from GitHub to Codeberg

#633

Post by joelreymont »

wavemode wrote: post #60
jeffbee wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree that's a funny coincidence. But, what about the change it wanted to commit? It is at least slightly interesting. It is doubly interesting that changing line 638 neither breaks nor fixes any test.

Perhaps the offset is always zero anyway in that scenario But yeah hard to say

It was a bug in my own modes to the Zig compiler not in the stock compiler itself.

Re: Migrating the main Zig repository from GitHub to Codeberg

#634

Post by grimgrin »

zdragnar wrote: post #613
jenadine wrote: post #561

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's why the article put that reason aside

It could have done an even better job of putting it aside by not even mentioning it at all. Instead we're all sitting here talking about it instead of the technical reasons.

so far we know of 1 branch, in 1 thread, on the entire internet, "talking about it instead"

Re: Migrating the main Zig repository from GitHub to Codeberg

#635

Post by ruined »

zdragnar wrote: post #613
jenadine wrote: post #561

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's why the article put that reason aside

It could have done an even better job of putting it aside by not even mentioning it at all. Instead we're all sitting here talking about it instead of the technical reasons.

they saw an opportunity for bait and you took it

Re: Migrating the main Zig repository from GitHub to Codeberg

#636

Post by monegator »

Lyngbakr wrote: post #589
nake89 wrote: post #485

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When confronted about LLM writing completely broken tests the guy said the funniest thing: "It knows what it’s doing but tends to be… lazy." I'm a big fan of LLMs but this guy is just a joke. He understand nothing of the code the LLM generates. He says things like "The LLM knows". He is not going to convince anybody to merge is PRs, since he is not even checking that the tests the LLM generates are correct. It's a jo…

In a submission to OCaml, when asked why the files he submitted list someone else as an author he says, > Beats me. AI decided to do so and I didn't question it.° I find that sort of attitude terrifying. ° https://github.com/ocaml/ocaml/pull/14369#issuecomment-35573...

that's a grifter doing grifting. there was a thread on /g/ about this guy the other day, anons digged out much of its past as a failure / grifter in many areas, running away with the money at the first problem

Re: Migrating the main Zig repository from GitHub to Codeberg

#637

Post by brendoelfrendo »

josephg wrote: post #601
missingdays wrote: post #582

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Are they actually losing customers over gh actions? I doubt it. Did you read the article?

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I doubt Zig was ever a paying customer of github.

Damn, I guess if Zig really wanted to spite Github they should have stayed and continued being a drain in Microsoft's resources.

Re: Migrating the main Zig repository from GitHub to Codeberg

#638

Post by greazy »

Levitating wrote: post #587
joelreymont wrote: post #369

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That one was poorly documented and may have been related to an issue in my code. I would offer this one instead. https://github.com/joelreymont/zig/pull/1

Just reading his blogposts, gross. He not only thinks he is actively contributing, he thinks he deserves credit.

FYI you're replying to the Joel the person being discussed. On HN he uses the username wagerlab

Re: Migrating the main Zig repository from GitHub to Codeberg

#639

Post by throw10920 »

brodo wrote: post #558
lII1lIlI11ll wrote: post #517

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Also, the big part of that issue is people are incentivized to make their GitHub profile look good to have a higher chance of getting hired. Do people really get hired for bunch of PRs to random repos on GH or just think they will? My impression has always been that GH profile is completely ignored by both recruiters and interviewers.

And this kind of behaviour is a red flag for people who actually go digging through the GitHub profile. Like techical people in the last stages of a hiring process.

Is this aspirational or anecdotal, or is this what technical people in FANNG/tech actually do? I hope it's true but it strikes me as the kind of thing that most technical people involved in the interview process would be too tired/overworked to do.

Re: Migrating the main Zig repository from GitHub to Codeberg

#640

Post by joelreymont »

greazy wrote: post #638
Levitating wrote: post #587

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just reading his blogposts, gross. He not only thinks he is actively contributing, he thinks he deserves credit.

FYI you're replying to the Joel the person being discussed. On HN he uses the username wagerlab

Yep, that's me!

I will look into renaming myself, although don't think HN allows this.

Post reply on HN