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

861–870 of 952 posts

Re: Migrating the main Zig repository from GitHub to Codeberg

#861

Post by veverkap »

porker wrote: post #309
notepad0x90 wrote: post #265

Earlier quoted context omitted.

if they call their employees monkeys, certainly. I think every big tech company is well aware of lawsuits regarding a hostile work environment, work place bullying, etc.. they all have company wide training on these topics. Having been in that situation before, if I even get a hint that I would be treated this way, I'm backing out of any interview. I won't say for no amount, but for no amount they would consider reas…

> if they call their employees monkeys, certainly. It seems to have decreased in the last 10 years but calling us code-monkeys was a common derogatory reference to the software department. I didn't like being compared to a monkey randomly bashing a typewriter but that's how things were. It was better than what everyone called HR.

He also called employees "losers"

Re: Migrating the main Zig repository from GitHub to Codeberg

#862

Post by tastyface »

budududuroiu wrote: post #687

Unsure if this post is being astroturfed or not, but seeing HackerNews root for Microsoft and boo communities that embrace alternatives feels very, anti-hacker in mentality. Sad state of affairs

Hacker News is a misnomer. This is a VC and FAANG mercenary watering hole.

Re: Migrating the main Zig repository from GitHub to Codeberg

#863

Post by Touche »

ivanjermakov wrote: post #663
woodruffw wrote: post #34

I don’t have strong opinions about Zig or Codeberg, but I find the self-described status of the latter’s infrastructure concerning[1]: they’re seemingly running faulty hardware in production with limited redundancy, and are actively soliciting more hardware of unknown quality/reliability/provenance from their community. This is cool for a hobbyist project, but it doesn’t scream “stable platform for a post-GitHub worl…

I would like to know the reasoning why Zig chose Codeberg instead of self-hosting something like gitea or forgejo. Seems to be a safer bet to limit hosting related weaknesses and unknowns, considering move from github being quite disruptive already.

One great thing about Forejo is that you can have a FreeBSD builder and on GH you cannot, have to spin up a slow VM.

Re: Migrating the main Zig repository from GitHub to Codeberg

#864

Post by strix_varius »

stocksinsmocks wrote: post #840
strix_varius wrote: post #802

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I’ll take badly made software for free No, not if I have to maintain it. Code is liability. LLM written PRs often bring net negative value: they make the whole system larger, more brittle, and less integrated. They come at the cost of end user quality and maintainer velocity.

Is that not also true of human written software that costs more per hour than the monthly cost of a coding agent? Developers are expected to ship enterprise software with defects that would land you in court if you made equivalent mistakes designing a water treatment plant or bridge. I get the “AI sucks” argument from a programmers point of view. It’s weird looking and doesn’t care about “code smells” or about rearra…

> Is that not also true of human written software that costs more per hour than the monthly cost of a coding agent?

The difference is that a human can learn and grow.

From your examples, it sounds like we're talking about completely different applications of code. I'm a software engineer who is responding to the original topic of reviewing PRs full of LLM slop. It sounds like you are a hobbyist who uses LLMs to vibe code personal apps. Your use case is, frankly, exactly what LLMs should be used for. It's analogous to how using a consumer grade 3d printer to make toys for your kids is fine, but nobody would want to be on the hook for maintaining full scale structural systems that were printed the same way.

Re: Migrating the main Zig repository from GitHub to Codeberg

#865

Post by CitrusFruits »

throw10920 wrote: post #639
brodo wrote: post #558

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

I've worked at a couple of companies with pay scales on part with FAANG, as well as a startup that was extremely selective in hiring. We rarely looked at GitHub, and never used it as a in a situation where someone got hired. I could see a situation where someone had good open source contributions it might help them get noticed by a recruiter, but that's so incredibly rare and hard to discover that it's kindof the last place people look. Having a good GitHub profile can't hurt, but LinkedIn is still king here

Re: Migrating the main Zig repository from GitHub to Codeberg

#866

Post by fragmede »

strix_varius wrote: post #864
stocksinsmocks wrote: post #840

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is that not also true of human written software that costs more per hour than the monthly cost of a coding agent? Developers are expected to ship enterprise software with defects that would land you in court if you made equivalent mistakes designing a water treatment plant or bridge. I get the “AI sucks” argument from a programmers point of view. It’s weird looking and doesn’t care about “code smells” or about rearra…

> Is that not also true of human written software that costs more per hour than the monthly cost of a coding agent? The difference is that a human can learn and grow. From your examples, it sounds like we're talking about completely different applications of code. I'm a software engineer who is responding to the original topic of reviewing PRs full of LLM slop. It sounds like you are a hobbyist who uses LLMs to vibe…

In this analogy though, a different someone designed a device or several devices and is printing them on a 3d printer and selling them online and making an alright living through that.

Re: Migrating the main Zig repository from GitHub to Codeberg

#868

Post by duxup »

petcat wrote: post #741
drannex wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That they don't support a nationalistic paramilitary organization that requires its members to be masked and never known by the public so they cant be held accountable? A nationalized KKK is not something to ever support.

I don't care about ICE one way or another, but calling people "monkeys" and "losers" because they're not building a product to your exact specifications is extremely childish. It seems to me that the real "losers" are the ones spending so much time bitching and moaning about a software platform they don't like.

> so much time bitching and moaning

They are doing more than that.

Re: Migrating the main Zig repository from GitHub to Codeberg

#869

Post by amake »

carlmr wrote: post #729
amake wrote: post #571

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You can be toxic at any level And yet the context is extremely important. > I didn't factor this in That's how you get to false equivalencies.

>That's how you get to false equivalencies. No, you're just putting something into it which doesn't matter to me. Not a false equivalency.

You said:

> blowing it up out of proportion is just as toxic

Making a false equivalency of the supposed toxicity of the commenter's post and the toxicity displayed in the article.

You can just take the L; you don't have to be performatively obtuse about it.

Re: Migrating the main Zig repository from GitHub to Codeberg

#870

Post by Spunkie »

hobofan wrote: post #799
shevy-java wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So you are ok with 2FA, right? If you contribute code there. Now - what if you are not ok with it? What can you do? > Almost offensively usable I think you conflate two points here. One is how useable github is. The other is: control. At which point are you no longer ok with what a private company does? This is not solely about Microsoft alone by the way.

> So you are ok with 2FA, right? Yes. Are you not? It's one of the most effective measures to prevent a whole class of supply chain attacks. On Github the 2FA is also flexible enough to allow non-hardware passkeys, so you can choose a privacy preserving option with good UX.

Last I looked a couple of years ago, GitHub 2fa has a lot of shoddy gotchas actually. There are a handful of GH issues on it with tons of comments.

For example it was impossible to remove/delete a phone number 2fa, even if you registered multiple other 2fa sources like security keys.

Post reply on HN