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

91–100 of 331 posts

Re: Gem.coop

#91

Post by spit2wind »

shadowgovt wrote: post #83
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 think right off the bat since they chose .coop as their TLD, a lot of corporate firewalls auto-block them and they have immediately decided to fight an uphill battle to get allow-listed to be a gem repo. This does not bode well for the team having the socio-technical savviness to see this project through.

Really? Maybe I'm naive, but why would .coop be blocked?

Re: Gem.coop

#92

Post by joeldrapper »

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.

I expect a lot of people will stop pushing gem updates to `rubygems.org` once `gem.coop` supports publishing directly to namespaces.

Re: Gem.coop

#93

Post by CaptArmchair »

steve_gh wrote: post #52
pil0u wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agreed. Your example could sound like exaggerated, but silence is a form of opinion, of vote, of approval. Even in a professional context, because work is part of the society we live in. This whole "DHH situation" with Rails has put my mind in weird position. I admire the Rails creator, the business man, the speaker. I admire what he builds, how passionate he is about his work and open-source software. But I very str…

> but silence is a form of opinion, of vote, of approval. I disagree. We don't have to have an opinion on everything. And what worries me is those (both on the left and on the right) who think that silence is a form of opinion or approval. It's getting very close to "those who are not with us are against us". And that's a worldview I have very little time for.

I'll put it like this.

Close by where I live is a monument for civilians who were taken from their houses and shot by the German occupiers during the last months of WWII. Simply because they were suspected of having distributed pamphlets. There wasn't even evidence to that claim, and retribution was a thing.

I passed that monument countless of times during my youth, giving me pause to contemplate.

It's a tangible reminder of what ultimately happens when people stay silent about something as final and poignant as one group denying the existence of another group for whatever reasons.

I have no problem with expressing differences over world views. I take issue when that world view entails denying the other side's existence because of differences, and a fervent intent to act on that notion.

It's a matter of boundaries, and speaking up.

Re: Gem.coop

#94

Post by nomdep »

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…

>It kind of feels like this fork is the better-maintained piece of software now.

Maybe, but I feel the value of the index is the storage and bandwidth and not the software itself, isn't it?

Could an index work by just being a search engine for gems, storing the hashes, but pointing to external resources, like GitHub repos, for the download itself?

Re: Gem.coop

#95

Post by sosodev »

soraminazuki wrote: post #87

So RubyGems has betrayed its community by ousting its maintainers. When a community-focused alternative created by the original maintainers is announced, it gets flagged on HN. What is wrong with people? This situation is eerily similar to the Freenode takeover[1] and the subsequent formation of Libera Chat[2] a few years ago, even down to the political leanings of those behind the takeover. Except if the Freenode in…

Flagging is definitely getting abused more on HN lately. The consensus seems to be that politics and/or morals are irrelevant outside of personal affairs so we must not have these conversations here.

Re: Gem.coop

#96

Post by shevy-java »

byroot wrote: post #90
Kudos wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a little glib, you dropped "Entirely" because you know multiple first hand accounts are actually worth something. If you want to argue the credibility of those accounts, then please be specific about it.

I dropped the entirely because I am on mobile. We don’t have multiple first hand accounts. All we have is second hand account being relayed by someone with a massive axe to grind against Shopify. There are a lot of truly committed Rubyists at Shopify, particularly the one handling the relationship with Ruby Central. The idea that Shopify had done what Joel aledges without a single one of the involved parties on the S…

So you critisize Joel because he worked at Shopify. He pointed that out when he wrote the article.

Let's add here that YOU also worked at Shopify, until recently.

IF we are going to be critical, then let's be complete here.

I actually think there is a lot of validity to the statement made that Shopify is NOT a neutral party here. We can dispute how much Shopify was involved, but to assume "all is unsubstantiated" while not even disclosing one's own work at Shopify, feels super-strange here.

Re: Gem.coop

#97

Post by shevy-java »

JimDabell wrote: post #9
wallmountedtv wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In short, a hostile takeover forced by Shopify through Ruby Central. It was sparked after Ruby Central chose to platform an extremist figure prominently for their last RailsConf against the wishes of the sponsors, losing them a lot of sponsorship money, as well as community support. https://joel.drapper.me/p/rubygems-takeover/

> It was sparked after Ruby Central chose to platform an extremist figure prominently for their last RailsConf This is so incredibly one-sided that it misleads more than it informs. The person they are talking about is DHH. Inviting the creator of Rails to speak at RailsConf – a conference for Rails – is not the outlandish behaviour this comment makes it sound like.

Agreed. There is a lot of conflation of statements that are not directly connected.

The whole DHH argument, for instance, as well as some people having a vendetta about him, is not, or not directly, related to the hostile take-over of rubygems.org. There is a slight partial overlap, but it is a separate discussion (even if DHH was involved with the take-over via Shopify because he does not like Arko or Shopify wanting more power-control to bully the independent developers at rubygems.org with more corporate rules and restrictions; and, by the way, DHH never mentions Arko's name, but even this is a separate discussion still. For instance I specifically do not care about rails nor DHH really, but the hostile take-over was a complete no-go. Ruby Central really pissed off too many people here and unfortunately there are still many open questions that ruby-core has to think about. I am not necessarily saying all came with malicious intent, because I think there is an english language barrier too in regards to Hiroshi Shibata, but even then it may be better to have someone with better knowledge about the english language in charge of gems; there seems to be some strange disconnect or translation going on between english, into japanese and japanese culture, and it is super-confusing.)

Re: Gem.coop

#98

Post by nomdep »

kimos wrote: post #66
directionless wrote: post #64

Given some of the ways Andre Arko gets described (See https://justin.searls.co/posts/why-im-not-rushing-to-take-si... for a recent overview) I'm a little wary of what the motivation behind this is.

This reads like a hit piece based on a personal vendetta. I'd be careful how much weight to give this.

> When Ruby Together first launched in 2015, the website suggested donations went to pay "our team" (...) This resulted in a nonzero number of donors believing they were funding the work of people like Steve Klabnik, Aaron Patterson, and Sarah Mei, when in fact only Andre was being paid at the time.

This a fact. By this alone I don't think Andre Arko is an honest person.

Re: Gem.coop

#99

Post by soraminazuki »

sosodev wrote: post #95
soraminazuki wrote: post #87

So RubyGems has betrayed its community by ousting its maintainers. When a community-focused alternative created by the original maintainers is announced, it gets flagged on HN. What is wrong with people? This situation is eerily similar to the Freenode takeover[1] and the subsequent formation of Libera Chat[2] a few years ago, even down to the political leanings of those behind the takeover. Except if the Freenode in…

Flagging is definitely getting abused more on HN lately. The consensus seems to be that politics and/or morals are irrelevant outside of personal affairs so we must not have these conversations here.

Which is absurd because the hostile takeover of RubyGems primarily involves technology, with serious implications for the security and trust of nearly all Ruby code. Those flagging this submission are the ones prioritizing politics over this critical issue.

Re: Gem.coop

#100

Post by shevy-java »

soraminazuki wrote: post #87

So RubyGems has betrayed its community by ousting its maintainers. When a community-focused alternative created by the original maintainers is announced, it gets flagged on HN. What is wrong with people? This situation is eerily similar to the Freenode takeover[1] and the subsequent formation of Libera Chat[2] a few years ago, even down to the political leanings of those behind the takeover. Except if the Freenode in…

I could be wrong but it may be that some have an additional agenda to try to make e. g. competition to Ruby Central fail. You can see this on ruby-reddit, e. g. by u/f9ae8221b - either way I think the by far best strategy for gem.coop is to address all concerns and statements made, including the wrong ones. Simply be better than rubygems.org - everywhere. (Also, u/f9ae8221b is super-impatient; why can't he wait for a while? Rome was not built in a day, it is strange how he thinks to know the future. I don't know the future - let's wait and see. In the worst case gem.coop will fail; in the best case it'll fix numerous issues, including, by the way, gem/bundler not having had the same functionality. And namespacing too; and inactive accounts, and so on, and so forth. There is a ton of things to do.)
Post reply on HN