Skip Navigation

InitialsDiceBearhttps://github.com/dicebear/dicebearhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/„Initials” (https://github.com/dicebear/dicebear) by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/)D

Daeraxa

@ Daeraxa @lemmy.ml

Posts
4
Comments
120
Joined
3 yr. ago

  • Inkscape Flatpak is looking for a maintainer!

    Jump

  • From the conversation it seems to be a similar situation to the project I'm with is in. The flatpak is essentially community maintained rather than being directly supported by the team. To become verified it needs to be done so by a representative of the maintainers of the software. To be verified it doesn't have to have a team member involved in it but this is a requirement Inkscape seem to have imposed.

    For us we just aren't in a position to want to support it officially just yet, we have some major upgrades coming to our underlying tech stack that will introduce a whole bunch of stuff that will allow various XDG portals etc. to work properly with the Flatpak sandboxing model. To support it now would involve tons of workarounds which would need to be removed later.

  • Linux geeks cheer as Arm wrestles x86 • The Register

    Jump

  • Yeah this has been our (well, my) statement on requests to put out ARM binaries for Pulsar. Typically we only put binaries out for systems we actually have within the team so we can test on real hardware and replicate issues. I would be hesitant to put out Windows ARM builds when, as far as I know, we don't have such a device. If there was a sudden clamouring for it then we could maybe purchase a device out of the funds pot.

    The reason I was asking more about if it was to do with developer licences is that we have already dealt with differences between x86 and ARM macOS builds because the former seems to happily run unsigned apps after a few clicks, where the latter makes you run commands in the terminal - not a great user experience.

    That is why I was wondering if the ARM builds for Windows required signing else they would just refuse to install on consumer ARM systems at all. The reason we don't sign at the moment is just because of the exorbitant cost of the certificates - something we would have to re-evaluate if signing became a requirement.

  • Linux geeks cheer as Arm wrestles x86 • The Register

    Jump

  • I can't say I'm one who shares that sentiment seeing as the only two projects I'm involved with happen to be Electron based (by chance rather than intention). Hell, one of them is Pulsar which is a continuation of Atom which literally invented Electron.

  • Linux geeks cheer as Arm wrestles x86 • The Register

    Jump

  • Is that a developer licence thing? I know GitHub recently announced Windows Arm runners that would be available to non-teams/enterprise tiers later this year.

  • Linux geeks cheer as Arm wrestles x86 • The Register

    Jump

  • Electron apps using older versions that don't support the 16k page size are probably the biggest offenders

  • Removed

    What's the best dish prepared by your mom/grandma?

    Jump

  • Never really had much of my Grandma's food other than her Christmas fruit cakes. My Mum would only ever cook out of necessity and never anything fancy. It was my dad that did all the nice cooking in my house.

  • FOSS programmers, what do you think of horrible people using your software?

    Jump

  • The moment you exclude any group or persons from your licence, it is, by definition, no longer open source.

    Of course that doesn't sit well with some people and there are some initiatives to try to account for that, for example the Hippocratic License that allows you to customise your licence to specifically exclude groups that might use your software to cause harm or the Do No Harm license with similar goals.

    Honestly, I find it hard to object to the idea. Some might argue it is a slippery slope away from the ideals of software freedom (as has been the case with some of the contraversial licenses recently like BSL and Hashicorp. I'm not a hardline idealist in the same way and if these more restrictive licenses that restrict some freedoms still produce software that might otherwise not exist then I'm happy they are around.

    Would I use one? Probably not, for me, whilst I like the idea, I think the controversy generated by using a non-standard licence would become its defining feature and would put off a lot of people from contributing to the project.

  • Interesting OSS project: Holesail creates instant P2P tunnels between networks (like a VPN)

    Jump

  • But... that is exactly what I've been saying since the start... If used correctly there is no need to instantly reject a project just because it uses Discord, or any other chat, as one of its options.

  • Interesting OSS project: Holesail creates instant P2P tunnels between networks (like a VPN)

    Jump

  • I feel you haven't been reading what I've been saying if you are claiming a "single chat log". The whole point of what I'm saying is that there are various forms of communication that can be used in a project and the one I'm part of literally couldn't function with an async-only forum type setup. Chat is for temporary, transient communication. Forums (and by extension Lemmy/Reddit) are for longer form async discussions with defined topics. Both are valid as has been the case all the way back into the days of having both a mailing list and IRC channel for a project.

  • Interesting OSS project: Holesail creates instant P2P tunnels between networks (like a VPN)

    Jump

  • You know IRC has been used alongside mailing list for open source software communities and projects for literally decades right?

  • Interesting OSS project: Holesail creates instant P2P tunnels between networks (like a VPN)

    Jump

  • The same could be said of Matrix though, I don't think you can see a Matrix chat without an account either. Discord does have a forum layout... ish. It is pretty bad though and not something we use as a forum. It is used but really only as a way to separate topics in what would be a busy single chat area - more akin to something like Zulip. Even IRC channels tend to need you to connect with a nickname but unlike the others you can't see chat history without a bouncer set up and at that point you have basically made an account in all but name.

  • Interesting OSS project: Holesail creates instant P2P tunnels between networks (like a VPN)

    Jump

  • That brings back memories... trying to play co-op games back in the day wasn't so easy as it is now...

  • Interesting OSS project: Holesail creates instant P2P tunnels between networks (like a VPN)

    Jump

  • I think that is more of a comment on incorrect use of such a platform and it would be the same whether it was IRC or Matrix. I've put a more detailed response to another comment if you were interested - https://lemmy.ml/comment/11850496

  • Interesting OSS project: Holesail creates instant P2P tunnels between networks (like a VPN)

    Jump

  • We use Discord rather extensively but we don't have this problem. I don't think the issue is Discord itself (or for that matter any chat, be it IRC or Matrix) but the way it is used. I think it unfair to just blacklist a project just because it uses it.

    We use Discord for team chat and conversations, the instant nature of a chat app suits this purpose far more than an async platform like a forum for us. This is either commonly known or transient info, not something we are interested in preserving. Long form conversations (like the status of our OS packaging) that require input over a long period goes into a forum topic.

    We also use it for support for short form questions and help - anything more than a quick answer or "active" help then we recommend filling in an issue form or using the forum.

    If a question comes up more than a few times then we make sure that it is documented - either in an FAQ or in the main documentation as it is clear that information isn't readily available or easy to find.

    I'm not necessarily defending their use of Discord as I don't know exactly what they are doing but it does seem they don't have any alternative community areas. In contrast, yes we have a Discord but we also have a Lemmy community, a Subreddit (I'm honestly against keeping that one going but we would rather not shut out users from support), Mastodon and forum.

    So no, it doesn't increase volunteer load in all cases, it is a valuable tool for us. Not that I'm wedded to Discord in particular (I'd honestly prefer to migrate it all to Matrix) but the idea of a chat platform for projects is not a bad thing by itself, it is how the project uses it.

  • Interesting OSS project: Holesail creates instant P2P tunnels between networks (like a VPN)

    Jump

  • Discord is still a legitimate form of contact and support for a lot of people. Out of interest, where do you see that line? I can only see Discord mentioned alongside e-mail and some other (even less tasteful than Discord) contact methods for support.

    To all those downvoting I'm not saying that Holesail is using Discord correctly, just saying that just having Discord (or any other chat platform) as an option shouldn't be an instant red flag and it depends on how the project actually utilises it.

  • Europeans of Lemmy, what places in Europe should foreigners avoid at all cost?

    Jump

  • Depends where you go, the vegetarian and vegan scene in Brighton is pretty damn impressive.

  • (Meta) So many questions here are not open ended. Does anyone care?

    Jump

  • Personally I think it's fine-ish given the actual number of topics being created - it seems to be easily low enough to not cause questions adhereing to the rules to be pushed down the list and buried with easier or more sensational questions. I think the danger of being a stickler to the rules is that you just drive people away or make them too intimidated to ask. Yeah it is annoying but I think it is fine to just downvote and move on as you say. Splitting the community I think would potentially do even more damage.

    Now if there were significantly more topics being created per day then my answer would be different and I would absolutely encourage more active moderation and adherence to the rules.

  • Artifactview - preview GitHub/Forgejo CI artifacts

    Jump

  • Totally understand the limits on your server, I know why you would have it set that way hence why I was wondering about the limits if self hosting. Definitely going to have a play with this.

  • Artifactview - preview GitHub/Forgejo CI artifacts

    Jump

  • This is really cool and something I've been missing since we kind of got forced off our original CI platform (they changed their free tier and it would have been financially prohibitive) and moved to GH runners.

    Is there a limit to the size? I notice that your example instance (and the default value) of file size is set to 100MB, is there a maximum size if you were to self host it or is it technically unlimited? Our CI artifacts tend to be around 700-800MB.