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

251–260 of 331 posts

Re: Gem.coop

#251

Post by RhythmFox »

gkbrk wrote: post #201
mperham wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well maintained? Rubygems has had no commits in the last 10 days and that's not a good sign. I don't think you can find a window with no commits for 10 days in its 15+ year history. History has shown over and over that when a for-profit org takes over public infrastructure, maintenance is cut to the bone.

> Rubygems has had no commits in the last 10 days and that's not a good sign. I honestly can't tell if this is satire. You think no commits for 10 days for a piece of software that has existed for around 20 years is a sign that it's dead? What kind of code churn do you think this project requires? Perhaps the old development was too unstable if there wasn't a single 10 day window without a commit in 15 years, for wha…

Churn is not just rate of commits it is the changing of the same lines/files/functions repeatedly, AI answers seem to get this wrong a few places I checked which is interesting. Rate of change in itself is not 'instability', it can be a sign of new ideas emerging or lot of other positive things.

Package management cannot be a 'solved problem' or there would be no innovation there, and you don't have to look far to find is not the case.

As for the idea that rubygems is 'dead' (not what mperham said), that is still too early to say for sure, as I imagine mperham would also agree, but it is definitely not a good sign. If we only get a trickle of changes to something that was once a very vibrant and lively community repo then that is to the detriment of the whole Ruby ecosystem. That would also be a bad sign.

Re: Gem.coop

#252

Post by krainboltgreene »

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…

It's so weird of you to jump in like this, man.

Re: Gem.coop

#253

Post by bombcar »

lawilli wrote: post #190
soraminazuki wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What? Which part of the word "co-op" sounds like a "childish revenge attempt"? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cooperative It's a word that nicely captures their objectives.

Maybe they read it like “coup”?

Chicken.coop

Re: Gem.coop

#254

Post by hitekker »

krainboltgreene wrote: post #252
tenderlove wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

It's so weird of you to jump in like this, man.

Can you explain what you find so weird? From what I can tell, the GP is adding useful information using his firsthand experience.

Re: Gem.coop

#255

Post by hitekker »

nomdep wrote: post #153
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…

I was misremembering it. Now that I've checked, it's clear that the claim was that the money was for paying "the team" [1], which consisted of André Arko and David Radcliffe [2] [1] https://web.archive.org/web/20150919025358/https://rubytoget... [2] https://web.archive.org/web/20150919025603/https://rubytoget...

Your links are off-base. They're from September 2015, which is months after Andre Arko was told to revise the /teams page.

Since no /teams page was archived before March 2015, here's the Github commit of the overly vague team page https://github.com/rubytogether/rubytogether.org/blob/9a03c4.... This page was linked from https://web.archive.org/web/20150425040538/http://RubyTogeth... which stated "We pool funds from corporate and individual members to pay our team[github link]"

Altogether, it demonstrates how Andre misled his audience on who was getting the money. IMO, I see a distinct pattern of him crossing boundaries and then covering it up using his social skills & friend group.

Re: Gem.coop

#256

Post by SirSavary »

phoronixrly wrote: post #224
lr0 wrote: post #218

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What "situation"?

Let's review for example Traefik's dependency list: https://github.com/traefik/traefik/blob/master/go.mod 1. Heavy dependency on Github. AKA Microsoft owns much of the golang ecosystem. Not just the source... The package distribution as well! 2. Many packages are referencing a git (short!) commit hash instead of a version. It still boggles my mind that this is an acceptable practice. Not to mention that git tags can…

1. GitHub dominance is a social phenomenon, not a technical requirement. The go.mod file you linked references ~14 different Git hosts other than GitHub. Go's design doesn't create this centralization; it merely reflects where developers choose to host code.

2. You complain about commit hashes while simultaneously noting that tags can be deleted and recreated. Hashes are precisely the solution to mutable tags. The "short hash" concern is a red herring; Git uses sufficient entropy that collisions are not a practical concern for dependency resolution.

As for "secure package distribution," go.sum files verify files verify consistent downloads. What additional security do you believe centralized registries provide?

3. Can you provide a concrete example of an ambiguous import you've encountered? I'm not familiar enough with Go to understand this criticism.

Re: Gem.coop

#257

Post by soraminazuki »

bobalob wrote: post #220
soraminazuki wrote: post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I suspect these "really vile things" will turn out to be not so vile (like JKR) "Not so vile" things like spreading lies about a female Olymics Boxer's gender, calling her terrible names, and inciting her online followers to harass her? She not only bullies transgender individuals but also targets other women who don't meet her own standards of femininity. If you have no problems with people like that, no wonder yo…

[flagged]

Shame on you for promoting libel by spreading unverified claims as fact. Have you even paused to consider what it's like for those on the receiving end of such harmful lies? Or do you, like JKR, revel in it even more after you've thought about it?

https://www.bbc.com/sport/olympics/articles/c4gp8evl009o

https://www.dw.com/en/algeria-condemns-baseless-imane-khelif...

https://www.snopes.com/news/2024/11/20/imane-khelif-medical-...

Re: Gem.coop

#258

Post by soraminazuki »

IshKebab wrote: post #213
soraminazuki wrote: post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I suspect these "really vile things" will turn out to be not so vile (like JKR) "Not so vile" things like spreading lies about a female Olymics Boxer's gender, calling her terrible names, and inciting her online followers to harass her? She not only bullies transgender individuals but also targets other women who don't meet her own standards of femininity. If you have no problems with people like that, no wonder yo…

Again, link? It's no good just talking about what heinous things someone has done. That kind of talk is always incredibly unreliable.

Evidence for thee, but not for me? You write with such authority on this topic, yet you insist on demanding evidence for even the most basic knowledge surrounding it.

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cm2njjm4e2po

https://xcancel.com/jk_rowling/status/1819007216214573268

https://xcancel.com/jk_rowling/status/1931144695771435140

Also, on another note, here's one of her many posts from JKR literally equating trans women with sexual predators.

https://xcancel.com/jk_rowling/status/1972054407148695732

It's astonishing how far some people will go to defend this kind of dehumanization of fellow human beings.

Re: Gem.coop

#259

Post by bobalob »

soraminazuki wrote: post #257
bobalob wrote: post #220

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Shame on you for promoting libel by spreading unverified claims as fact. Have you even paused to consider what it's like for those on the receiving end of such harmful lies? Or do you, like JKR, revel in it even more after you've thought about it? https://www.bbc.com/sport/olympics/articles/c4gp8evl009o https://www.dw.com/en/algeria-condemns-baseless-imane-khelif... https://www.snopes.com/news/2024/11/20/imane-khelif…

Of course Algeria are going to deny it. But look:

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/boxing/2025/06/01/imane-khelif-m...

https://www.3wiresports.com/articles/2025/6/1/xxyetyl1aewfij...

https://lecorrespondant.net/docteur-suis%e2%80%91je-un-homme...

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/imane-khelif-eindhoven-ne...

The evidence indicates that Khelif is male, with male physiological advantage, and therefore should never have been competing in women's boxing. And it is a matter of record that Khelif withdrew from the Eindhoven Cup rather than take the sex verification tests required to compete.

That proposed lawsuit mentioned in your BBC article near the end of 2024 went nowhere, by the way. How could it? The facts show there was no libel.

Re: Gem.coop

#260

Post by LexiMax »

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?

It's one of those "attractive distractions" that us nerds like to bikeshed over.

Honestly, after "tweet" caught on as a verb, I've given up on thinking that we have any sort of crystal ball when it comes to names.

Post reply on HN