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

Gem.coop

gem.coop

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 331 posts

Re: Gem.coop

#191

Post by drak0n1c »

bsammon wrote: post #143
busterarm wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think a lot of people are forgetting or at least choose to ignore that DHH is Danish (and specifically a Danish expat) and is probably more inclined to have controversial views on immigration from majority Islamic countries. That's not to give his statements a pass, but to give them some needed context. And no, I'm not saying that Danes are racist.

I think a lot of people don't know why being Danish is relevant. Is there some reason why controversial views on immigration might be less suprising coming from a Dane?

Denmark is the rare case of a European nation where its center-left listened to feedback from the electorate early on and earnestly adopted policies restricting immigration and refugee admission. As a result they had no populist backlash, and that policy position is uncontroversial to hold publicly.

Re: Gem.coop

#192

Post by sussmannbaka »

phoronixrly wrote: post #72
mijoharas wrote: post #68

So, ignoring everything that got us here, what do people think about this? As I see it, there is the original rubygems, which has lost all of it's maintainers, and this new one, that has most of the original active maintainers? (how many were there before? it has most of the ones I think about, but I didn't know who was active over there. I mostly saw activity from deivid and didn't know about most of the others to b…

I don't plan on switching to a rubygems fork that does not offer technical/security benefits over the original. They can win me over with a gem distribution site that requires code signing out of the box and a bundler that enforces it out of the box.

They had a minor security incident right off the bat, demonstrating they don’t even fully understand what they stole. They aren’t equipped to do the job.

Re: Gem.coop

#194

Post by seanw444 »

mijoharas wrote: post #180
stanislavb wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

With this is in place. A ".coop" domain does not signal trustworthiness. It's more like a childish revenge attempt. Don't get me wrong. I think it's a great idea for the original maintainers to begin work on a form. However, they could have chosen a better domain name.

I saw someone else saying something about the domain name, but I didn't really give it a second thought when I read it. Can you explain what the issue is?

I'd only say it's a real issue if this were a "normie-facing" website. But being a developer tool, we all know that there are legitimate domains other than .com, .org, and .net.

Re: Gem.coop

#195

Post by JimmaDaRustla »

stanislavb wrote: post #176
soraminazuki wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Trustworthiness is far more important for a package manager. No amount of storage or bandwidth can compensate for an untrustworthy package manager.

With this is in place. A ".coop" domain does not signal trustworthiness. It's more like a childish revenge attempt. Don't get me wrong. I think it's a great idea for the original maintainers to begin work on a form. However, they could have chosen a better domain name.

> It's more like a childish revenge attempt.

Gaslight much? "coop" implies intention and direction...you know, that thing that rubygems.org could have used?

Re: Gem.coop

#196

Post by byroot »

steveklabnik wrote: post #154
poorman wrote: post #151

Here's the thing. They could have put up link to a git repository where others can follow along with the maintenance of this project, but here isn't one. There is a list of maintainers explicitly mentioned on this page but no link to the git repository. This leads me to think this project is not about the code but about the people.

Source lives here: https://github.com/gem-coop

The only public repo is a static website.

Re: Gem.coop

#197

Post by steveklabnik »

tenderlove wrote: post #188
steveklabnik wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Back in the day, nobody ever had said to me that they believed I was earning money from Ruby Together. This whole thing was speculation at best. And regardless, once it was suggested that this may be a possibility, it was immediately changed to be unambiguous. André is absolutely a standup individual. I have tried to stay in good terms with the other people involved in this (except DHH), but this claim was always rid…

This absolutely happened and is not speculation. I can't find the emails from the individuals that emailed me, but I did find my email to the board of directors asking that the website language be changed because people had pinged me thinking I would be getting money, or that the money would go to fund rubygems.org. At the time I'd sent the email I was unaware Ruby Together was on HN front page (and that's why people…

Okay, if you got emails, you got emails, but I did not.

I absolutely wouldn't want people to think that I'd be getting the money, so I think clarifying it was a good thing, regardless.

Re: Gem.coop

#198

Post by shadowgovt »

florkbork wrote: post #189
shadowgovt wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most places seem to manage. But thinking that they can disregard all prior Internet history and just slam into the situation with no concern about what came before is pretty on-brand for a project in the Ruby ecosystem.

Ah yes, "slam in" to a situation is definitely the correct terminology for forking a project that was seized from you by a hostile party.

I mean regarding the choice of TLD. Forking the package repository ecosystem I fully understand the incentives; it just strikes me as a very Ruby-ecosystem thing to just assume that `.coop` is a good enough TLD with no consequences for using it relative to choosing to use .org, .com, or .net.

Re: Gem.coop

#199

Post by erxam »

marknutter wrote: post #193
shadowgovt wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Generally, bigotry is bias based on immutable traits. Beliefs are not immutable.

[flagged]

Oh, of course.

To a right-winger, safety is bigotry and hatred is love. Of course, how else could it ever be.

Do you really care about freedom if you don't let white nationalists abuse everyone and everything in their power all the time?

Re: Gem.coop

#200

Post by steveklabnik »

byroot wrote: post #196
steveklabnik wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Source lives here: https://github.com/gem-coop

The only public repo is a static website.

Ah! Good catch. I saw the repo exists but didn't dig into the contents, given that it's (as far as I know) purely a proxy for rubygems at the moment, I figured it would be pretty simple.

I agree they should post the whole source, regardless.

Post reply on HN