Live data from Hacker News

Migrating the main Zig repository from GitHub to Codeberg

ziglang.org

711–720 of 952 posts

Re: Migrating the main Zig repository from GitHub to Codeberg

#711

>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…

GitHub's API has extremely aggressive rate limits which make migrating large numbers of existing issues and PRs off of the platform borderline impossible. AIUI, this is why Gitea's main repo is on GitHub: they couldn't figure out a way to cleanly migrate! The tinfoil hat in me absolutely sees this as an attempt at vendor lock-in on GitHub's end.

Re: Migrating the main Zig repository from GitHub to Codeberg

#712

Earlier 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...

That’s a bummer to hear. I last used GitLab in 2021 and quite enjoyed it then. Although it does make sense - GitLabs former CTO/CPO now works at OpenAI as their CRO. That kind of shift doesn’t happen in a vacuum. I worked with this person at a previous company and they were an incredibly destabilizing force there - so I was pretty nervous for GitLab after their hiring.

Re: Migrating the main Zig repository from GitHub to Codeberg

#713

Earlier 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]

One or the biggest ironies in US politics to me is the complaints about the degradation of the rule of law in this country under Trump. While simultaneously arguing that federal immigration law should be actively ignored and blocked by cities and states. Of course the details are all messy and complicated. But if you feel both of those things are true, you owe it to yourself to take a moment and reflect on the irony of your own views. Empathy for people you disagree with is in dangerously short supply these days and is fundamental to a functioning democracy.

Re: Migrating the main Zig repository from GitHub to Codeberg

#714

Earlier 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?

Does it matter? Either way seems to just reflect badly on the junior, who needs to improve their self-review skills and knowledge

Re: Migrating the main Zig repository from GitHub to Codeberg

#715
post #573

Earlier 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.

I'll take any CI service that isn't cobbled together by mountains of nested and indirected YAML.

Absolute horror to maintain.

Re: Migrating the main Zig repository from GitHub to Codeberg

#716
post #35

> 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.

I feel like the distinction is equivalent to

    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

#717
> Thank you to the Forgejo contributors who helped us with our issues switching to the platform, as well as the Codeberg folks who worked with us on the migration - in particular Earl Warren, Otto, Gusted, and Mathieu Fenniak.

To 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

#718

Earlier 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)

That is a curious take. Open source projects were flooded by dumb PRs before AI too, so what would it prove?

Re: Migrating the main Zig repository from GitHub to Codeberg

#719
post #309

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.

"code-monkey" is a bit different, I've seen people use it to call themselves that in a positive way. Maybe Andrew meant "code-monkey" in a more positive way instead of "monkey"? But i just re-read it and to me it sounds like an insult to their intelligence, to mean as if it was one of those studies where they train a monkey to hit keys to see what happens? Like they were so dumb it was the equivalent of monkeys hitting keyboards and accidentally creating something that works?

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

#720

Earlier 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]

[dead]
Post reply on HN