• 125 Posts
  • 878 Comments
Joined 2 years ago
cake
Cake day: June 11th, 2023

help-circle

  • AI-assisted coding […] means more ambitious, higher-quality products

    I’m skeptical. From my own (limited) experience, my use-cases and projects, and the risks of using code that may include hallucinations.

    there are roughly 29 million software developers worldwide serving over 5.4 billion internet users. That’s one developer for every 186 users,

    That’s an interesting way to look at it, and that would be a far better relation than I would have expected. Not every software developer serves internet users though.














  • Unfortunately, I find the need to have an account in order to contribute to projects a deal breaker. It causes too much friction for no real gain. Email based workflows will always reign supreme. It’s the OG of code contributions.

    After opening with a need to be open-minded, this seems quite close-minded. Sure, it’s their article. Still, I was hoping for a more neutral and substantiated advocating and description.

    I certainly didn’t feel like it answered [all] my questions and concerns in multiple sections.


  • I somewhat like the idea of being able to submit issues via email directly. It does cost on spam classification and prevention, though. An account is easily classifiable as an additional confidence metric. E-Mail, not so much, or with significantly more complexity in relating data and ensuring continuity of source.

    An account is a very obvious way to build a reputation. If you see a new GitHub account submitting a PR vs someone having contributed for a long time and significant projects in the same technology, you may approach the reviews quite differently. It is, at least, a very useful and simple way to classify authors and patch submitters.

    What does SourceHut provide in this aspect? To what degree does it verify incoming emails authenticity, sender source, and continuity of source hoster? To what degree does it relate information by email address? I assume it does not.


  • Additionally, the total size of “non-promoted” content, that is repositories that are for personal use (e.g. “my website”, “my dotfiles”) as well as private repositories, should not exceed 100 MiB

    🤔 made me explore; there are no paid tiers, and the FAQ explains intentions:

    In many cases, yes, but please read on. Our goal is to support Free Content, and we do not act as a private hosting for everyone! However, if we see that you contribute to Free Software / Content and the ecosystem, we allow up to 100 MB of private content for your convenience. Further exceptions are spelled out in our Terms of Service:


    I’ve always seen Codeberg as a hosting platform much like GitHub and GitLab. But I see now it’s a much more deliberate and specific effort and platform. And “personal use” [only] is not part of that.



  • Kissaki@programming.devtoProgramming@programming.devFirefox has moved onto Github
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    7 days ago

    RE: phabricator…I don’t know what that service is or is for, so I can’t comment if there’s any proof therein.

    The how to submit a patch section documents that that’s where they accept patches. And they do their reviews and change iterations there. By necessity, that also means hosting/having the repos.


    That’s confusing to me.

    They only accept patches on Phabricator, have the sources there, but suggest using GitHub, but afterwards Phabricator to submit the changes?

    I can only imagine it’s to lower barrier to entry because GitHub is more well known. But this just seems like a confusing mess to me, without clear wording of intentions and separation of concerns [in their docs, not your post or comment here].