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

Migrating the main Zig repository from GitHub to Codeberg

ziglang.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

891–900 of 952 posts

Re: Migrating the main Zig repository from GitHub to Codeberg

#891

Post by yunohn »

kristoff_it wrote: post #648
antirez wrote: post #583

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I hope the best for Zig, Loris. But even if Zig will survive and prosper (I hope for both), still I believe this is not a sounding decision and not the right attitude. I hope I'm wrong, but I wanted to share with you my reasoning. Here you are moving away from the open source marketplace AND from your main revenue stream. It's not similar to not posting anymore to Twitter. A better parallel would be not posting anymo…

We've been directing people to use other means to donate for a few years now, so GH Sponsors is not our main source of income anymore (and hasn't been for a while). It's still a significant chunk, but it's also not going to go away overnight. > A better parallel would be not posting anymore on Hacker News anything Zig related, in terms of potential outcome. I've been thinking about this lately and in my experience (h…

> It's still a significant chunk, but it's also not going to go away overnight.

You despise and are leaving GitHub, but intend to keep collecting money from their sponsorship feature/program? Sounds like they are doing something right then…

Re: Migrating the main Zig repository from GitHub to Codeberg

#892

Post by account42 »

sylware wrote: post #542

Very good move, codeberg is noscript/basic (x)html friendly, which microsoft github is no more. Unfortunately, zig is in bad shape since microsoft rust is pushed hard everywhere in spite of zig.

> Very good move, codeberg is noscript/basic (x)html friendly

No, they use the Anubis malware.

Re: Migrating the main Zig repository from GitHub to Codeberg

#893

Post by timcobb »

DrBazza wrote: post #521
throwaway150 wrote: post #425

Earlier quoted context omitted.

GitHub was very snappy in the early days. I remember how refreshing I found GitHub when it was new. I don't know when but sometime after 2020 it has just been going downhill.

The same could be said of Jira. I could switch on the dev console in the Browser, and see which one loads the largest amount of Javascript, but I'd be disappointed with both.

I'm 40 years old and I've never heard or experienced such things :)

Re: Migrating the main Zig repository from GitHub to Codeberg

#894

Post by maybewhenthesun »

lozenge wrote: post #432
maybewhenthesun wrote: post #406

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All companies are 'a group of people'. But that's not how you treat them. You should treat the individual employees of microsoft as the people they are. You should treat microsoft as a whole as the evil entity it is (TBF they're not worse than apple or google or etc...)

But the post isn't talking about Microsoft, it's specifically calling the people that work on GitHub monkeys.

I don't see anybody called out by name.

To me saying 'product X is so bad, it's coded by monkeys' is not really a personal insult to a specific coder, but a decrying of a company.

Hell, if I would be a github engineer I'd probably agree.

Re: Migrating the main Zig repository from GitHub to Codeberg

#895

Post by joelreymont »

antirez wrote: post #494

Wow. I think that's a serious mistake. Maybe GitHub is no longer so great and snappy but nowhere to justify moving something that needs: 1. Money, 2. Exposition, to something obscure just because it's a bit better. It's Git with an UI anyway, there isn't such large difference. I don't care about the fact the post is harsh: it's the content that it is broken from my POV because. It is absolutely legit to do something…

Moving away from Github may end up killing the project.

Re: Migrating the main Zig repository from GitHub to Codeberg

#896

Post by mexicocitinluez »

nmz wrote: post #801
mexicocitinluez wrote: post #781

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not rooting for Microsoft, but comments like this: > with the remaining rookies eager to inflict some kind of bloated, buggy JavaScript framework on us in the name of progress. and > More importantly, Actions is created by monkeys are juvenile.

While juvenile, it is a fair point that github and all websites that ditch everything for javascript get less snappy to use.

Yea but this is going from the assumption that there aren't benefits to using JavaScript or reasons other than snappiness for introducing new (or in this case a decade old framework).

We don't know how these decisions are made, who is making them, or more importantly, why they're being made. And attributing all of that to the developers being monkeys make me think the author has never actually worked for a real company before or is conveniently forgetting what it's like to.

Re: Migrating the main Zig repository from GitHub to Codeberg

#897

Post by stabbles »

SavioMak wrote: post #860
stabbles wrote: post #363

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The best free CI system in the world has macOS 15 runners running at 75% capacity due to a background process that consumes 100% CPU [1]. The problem is known to them since May but not fixed half a year later. [1] https://github.com/actions/runner-images/issues/13358

They fixed it 8 hours after your comment lol

Not the case

Re: Migrating the main Zig repository from GitHub to Codeberg

#898

Post by rldjbpin »

nromiun wrote: post #139

So much vague outrage over nothing. That CI system created by so called monkeys is the one of the best free CI service in the world. Not everyone has the millions of dollars like Zig Foundation to create their own CI servers. After that they appreciate GitHub Sponsors, but say it is now a complete liability just because a project leader left. What are the actual changes? Any new rule? But no, it is now a "liability"…

the technical issues are completely valid. at the same time, there is a balance between citing reasons for the change and burning bridges with those you leave behind.

the friction caused for the supporters felt a bit tone deaf. although the project itself runs on strong principles so i can imagine they know what they signed up for.

Re: Migrating the main Zig repository from GitHub to Codeberg

#899

Post by rldjbpin »

shridharxp wrote: post #185
johnfn wrote: post #95

> it’s abundantly clear that the talented folks who used to work on the product have moved on to bigger and better things, with the remaining losers eager to inflict some kind of bloated, buggy JavaScript framework on us in the name of progress. > More importantly, Actions is created by monkeys This writing really does not reflect well on Zig. If you have technical issues with Github, fine: cite them. But leave ad ho…

It's okay to bring some "natural" language in technical communication. It feels more humane. All the whitewashed corporate language, riddled marketing bullshit feels so soul dead.

that's all well and good but not when it is peddled by you simultaneously in other facets: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46065778

Re: Migrating the main Zig repository from GitHub to Codeberg

#900

Post by sylware »

account42 wrote: post #892
sylware wrote: post #542

Very good move, codeberg is noscript/basic (x)html friendly, which microsoft github is no more. Unfortunately, zig is in bad shape since microsoft rust is pushed hard everywhere in spite of zig.

> Very good move, codeberg is noscript/basic (x)html friendly No, they use the Anubis malware.

Last time I did check codeberg, they were very careful at being noscript/basic (x)html browser friendly.

Weird. Need to double check I guess.

Post reply on HN