>Let us please consider the GitHub issues that remain open as metaphorically “copy-on-write”. Please leave all your existing GitHub issues and pull requests alone. No need to move your stuff over to Codeberg unless you need to make edits, additional comments, or rebase. We’re still going to look at the already open pull requests and issues; don’t worry. No way for those to be moved too or not worth the effort? Unless…
Migrating the main Zig repository from GitHub to Codeberg
711–720 of 952 posts
Re: Migrating the main Zig repository from GitHub to Codeberg
#712Earlier quoted context omitted.
I wish GH had issues only every 2 years. That’d be amazing! We see issues weekly - if not near daily - at work. Personally I advocate for self-hosted GitLab. I like their pipelines a lot more than GH Actions too.
Unfortunately, IMO Gitlab is getting enshittified too and adding llm slop features instead of improving the developer experience...
Re: Migrating the main Zig repository from GitHub to Codeberg
#713Earlier quoted context omitted.
I feel like that's the whole point of the OP. I agree with the overall post but mentioning the ICE relationship seems to detract from the main point. "I hate GitHub because X Y and Z features are bad" is a good reason to move away; "I hate GitHub because one of their thousands of enterprise customers does not align with my political views" is not, in my opinion. For the record, I do not support ICE
[flagged]
Re: Migrating the main Zig repository from GitHub to Codeberg
#714Earlier quoted context omitted.
I absolutely don't care about how people generate code, but they are responsible for every single line they push for review or merge. That's my policy in each of my clients and it works fine, if AI makes something simpler/faster, good for the author, but there's 0, none, excuses for pushing slop or code you haven't reviewed and tested yourself thoroughly. If somebody thinks they can offset not just authoring or editi…
Totally agree. For me, the hard part has been figuring out the distinction with junior engineers... Is this poorly thought out, inefficient solution that is 3x as long as necessary due to AI, or inexperience?
Re: Migrating the main Zig repository from GitHub to Codeberg
#715Earlier quoted context omitted.
Gitlab smokes and rolls githubs shitty ass CI all day any day for over 10 years now
I've had so many issues with Gitlab CI. I don't think it's really any better than Github's.
Absolute horror to maintain.
Re: Migrating the main Zig repository from GitHub to Codeberg
#716> As a bonus, we look forward to fewer violations (exhibit A, B, C) of our strict no LLM / no AI policy, Hilarious how the offender on "exhibit A" [1] is the same one from the other post that made the frontpage a couple of days ago [2]. [1] https://github.com/ziglang/zig/issues/25974 [2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46039274
My old rule about the difference between coding and software engineering: For coding, "it seems to work for me" is good enough. For software engineering, it's not. My new rule: For coding, you can use AI to write your code. For software engineering, you can't.
LLMs can make mistakes. Humans can't.
Humans can and do make mistakes all the time. LLMs can automate most of the boring stuff, including unit tests with 100% coverage. They can cover edge cases you ask them to and they can even come up with edge cases you may not have thought about. This leaves you to do the review.I think think the underlying problem people have is they don't trust themselves to review code written by others as much as they trust themselves to implement the code from scratch. Realistically, a very small subset of developers do actual "engineering" to the level of NASA / aerospace. Most of us just have inflated egos.
I see no problem modelling the problem, defining the components, interfaces, APIs, data structures, algorithms and letting the LLM fill in the implementation and the testing. Well designed interfaces are easy to test anyway and you can tell at a glance if it covered the important cases. It can make mistakes, but so would I. I may overlook something when reviewing, but the same thing often happens when people work together. Personally I'd rather do architecture and review at a significantly improved speed than gloat I handcrafted each loop and branch as if that somehow makes the result safer or faster (exceptions apply, ymmv).
Re: Migrating the main Zig repository from GitHub to Codeberg
#717To me this said more than anything else in the post. The fact that there are genuine people at forgejo/codeburg that give a thought about what they are working on is pure gold.
Re: Migrating the main Zig repository from GitHub to Codeberg
#718Earlier quoted context omitted.
I cannot believe it's not trolling
Yeah, either this guy's totally insane or it could even be somebody who's an AI skeptic who's just flooding projects with really dumb PRs just to show the risks and get people skeptical about the use of AI in open source (Takes on my folie hat)
Re: Migrating the main Zig repository from GitHub to Codeberg
#719Earlier 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.
Either way, can we at least agree that it is an insult to those people at a personal level, it attacks who they are instead of what they did?
Like i mentioned, I've had myself/coworkers compared to monkeys in the same way. I didn't think much of it at first, but coworkers were really demoralized and kept mentioning it, and it coincided with all sorts of other hosilities from people in power.
My whole goal here wasn't to demonstrate some internet rage, but to do my part in making sure other people don't get treated like crap, especially in their work place. If this was at my work, I'd probably just quietly look for other places to work at, because I'd be afraid for my job. In this case it's not like Microsoft employees can publicly respond in like to Andrew and not lose their jobs either. I see someone with some level of authority and a public figure abusing that to harass others.
There is no asshole-badge that is granted to people when they achieve positions of authority, a louder voice or great success in life. Those of us who can implement some sort of an adverse response to this behavior, must.
Re: Migrating the main Zig repository from GitHub to Codeberg
#720Earlier quoted context omitted.
I feel like that's the whole point of the OP. I agree with the overall post but mentioning the ICE relationship seems to detract from the main point. "I hate GitHub because X Y and Z features are bad" is a good reason to move away; "I hate GitHub because one of their thousands of enterprise customers does not align with my political views" is not, in my opinion. For the record, I do not support ICE
[flagged]