BTW, could we all please stop creating Electron apps and spend time to properly code native, resource-efficient software instead of shipping a full browser engine in every single application?
Fork: A fast and friendly Git client for Mac and Windows
171–173 of 173 posts
Re: Fork: A fast and friendly Git client for Mac and Windows
#172Is there such thing as "remote git"? As someone who gave up trying to run Docker under WSL, returning to the warm embrace of Linux on VMWare, I tried most git clients and found them not usable over neither Samba nor NFS share. Console git pseudo-GUIs are pretty good now (lazygit is my workhorse), but I miss the ability to easily scroll around. If a client could support SSH-based workflow with remote git execution, th…
When I develop for arm Linux, I use local git on Windows PC. I share that folder with CIFS, mount on Linux, build and run my stuff from the mounted directory. As a nice side effect, the disk speed is much faster, the PC has fast SSD, target device uses much slower SD card for the system drive.
Re: Fork: A fast and friendly Git client for Mac and Windows
#173Earlier quoted context omitted.
Even in the US, it's common to have clauses about specific illegal activity, such as breaking embargoes or similar. For example, you might be banned from using the software in, or cooperating with someone located in, Iran. You could do both of those with a git client. This is more generally phrased than the very lawyer-written EULAs you generally find, but it's not unreasonable or unprecedented.
Assuming for the sake of argument that I'm not supposed to collaborate with someone in some particular place... why again do the authors of these clients care about that? Are the black-bag squad going to disappear them because they didn't warn us to be good? Actually the charitable interpretation is probably that this is a sort of cargo-culted license without much informed decision-making behind it. Embargoes and san…
Rather than protecting themselves, it's more likely that the author of the software desires that their software is only used for legal or ethical purposes, and that clause is their attempt to require that.
It's fair for a software author to not want their software used to make the world worse. I think you have a very different interpretation of "charitable interpretation" than I do.
As for embargoes - sure. It's just an example. There are plenty of other less morally ambiguous things too.