Report an issue to someone
"Yes I know but I won't actually acknowledge it until you make an issue about it on GitHub"
This feels awfully similar to huge mega-corporations telling you to use a very specific form to report issues, where they explicitly design the form in such a way that you'll get more upset at the form than the original issue, and give up.
Clearly the spirit of free software is still lacking in the vast majority of "free" software projects.
@icedquinn@blob.cat I don't mind opening a ticket on its own, but I do mind having to use a user-hostile environment to open the ticket in.
@icedquinn@blob.cat I would agree with this in principle, end-users write terrible bug reports to begin with. But I have been active in IT for a while, I generally understand what needs to go in one and especially for free software projects, I don't necessarily mind putting in some effort on my end. They're doing work for gratis, its not wrong for them to expect me to put in some effort on my side in that regard.
It is very wrong of them to demand the use of a proprietary platform if they call themselves a free software project.
bonifartius 𒂼𒄄
@tyil @icedquinn github is actively getting worse. iirc i have to be logged in to use the code search now.
it's just a shit place and microsoft succeeded at EEE again.
@icedquinn @tyil if only drew wouldn't have lost his marbles.
@bonifartius@qoto.org @icedquinn@blob.cat So long as it doesn't impact SourceHut I don't mind what Drew does or says in his spare time. Someone's personal life is their own, all I care about is quality software.
@tyil @icedquinn well he explicitly said that i can be fucked and should be ashamed:
> And fuck Richard Stallman and his enablers, his supporters, and the Free Software Foundation’s leadership as a whole. Shame on you. Shame on you.
guess being against cancel mobs spreading lies is something to be ashamed of now.
so i'd rather not touch anything drew and certainly won't "enable" him by paying money.
@bonifartius@qoto.org @icedquinn@blob.cat I disagree with his statements on RMS too, and I can certainly understand your desire to avoid him and his projects because of it. I too wouldn't contribute to anything he makes due to the harassing nature I would expose myself to. Same reason why I avoid projects with a CoC.
i had a gitea for a while but nobody really used it and it sucked up most of my tiny vps. then we were supposed to hate gitea because shenanigans happened and by that point i already migrated to srht instead of forgejo.
i will miss phabricator, though, rip.
@icedquinn@blob.cat @bonifartius@qoto.org I can understand why he bans the cryptoscam industry, though. The amount of abuse coming from those is absolutely insane, and so far none of them have made any positive impact on the world, nor are they showing any signs of this ever happening.
@icedquinn@blob.cat @bonifartius@qoto.org That's why I self-host my git repos and CI infrastructure!
But genuinely, a for-profit company not allowing those that cost them a lot of money while not contributing anything in return is simply a bad investment. It's not just cryptoscams, if you're just going to abuse the CI to run non-productive workloads that hog all the CPU for 4 hours, you're getting banned regardless of your affiliation with this scam industry. I don't find this particularly upsetting. If you want to do dumb stuff like that, you can always self-host it and pay for the costs yourself.
@icedquinn@blob.cat @bonifartius@qoto.org For cryptoscams in particular, yes, because they have so far all proven to be scams in one way or the other, and there's no indication of one arising that isn't a scam. The whole blockchain technology is a useless one desperately looking for a problem to solve.
> tyranny is good as long as i agree with it
i'm pretty sure we're talking past each other
@icedquinn@blob.cat @bonifartius@qoto.org We might be, but my point is that sr.ht is a for-profit company. They make decisions to ensure they make profit. Allowing cryptoscam projects in is a sure-fire way to lose money. They've collectively shown they cannot be trusted to be good citizens. The technology they depend on is not usable for anything positive, and it shows in how the field behaves.
As I said, if you want to do dumb and expensive things, you can self-host the infrastructure for this. SourceHut itself is free software.
Not allowing even the code projects to exist is no more than a measure to ensure those abuse behaviours aren't even invited. I may or may not agree with this, but I can understand the reasoning.
@icedquinn@blob.cat @bonifartius@qoto.org So do I, I'd greatly recommend it if you can't (or don't want to) host your own git infra. I'd also still recommend it over a self-hosted gitea or something, as those still require me to register Yet Another Account Somewhere, and that's just dumb.
@bonifartius@qoto.org @icedquinn@blob.cat Yes, code search on #GitHub being locked behind an account is a ridiculously stupid move. But let's be honest, everyone could see it coming, and we all know its going to get a lot worse as time goes on.
Apparently "free" software developers are very afraid of email nowadays and they cannot comprehend doing any git-related actions outside of a very sluggish web interface. The only "alternative" most of them see is #GitLab, which comes with its own set of issues and is getting worse every other week as well.