If I had a way to label users in Lemmy I’d label you Littlefinger

One man’s trash is actually that same man’s server, now

And tanks and jet engines

Assuming that all services you log into support multiple passkeys. My auto financing company doesn’t, for example

I was referring to Clipchamp, not the OS

Because it’s a “free” piece of software so you are the product and therefore they want you to agree that they can harvest and sell your data

I now want a community led historical reenactment of loose tie wearing software devs in the 60s where they are just chain smoking and banging out COBOL or Fortran punch cards

Right. Given the option I will always choose to work with a decent programmer who can communicate well and documents their code, over a very strong programmer that doesn’t think they should waste time with documentation

I imagine if the legacy silicon hardware is straight from the factory the shape of the plastic doesn’t really matter too much

In all seriousness, afaik not unless they can replicate the wobble groove pressed into the discs, which is possible if they can press their own discs in bulk, but probably more expensive than it’s worth unless they are selling a ton of these

As long as “cleaner than you found it” also includes “better documented.” I’ve worked with people who think that “the code should speak for itself” to the point that they will make biased decisions with no explanation or documentation and then if you ask them about it after their response is “look at the PR for how that decision was made.” I’m not going to git blame and find your PR to find an outcome from an argument between two people that after scrolling just says “sometimes the API returns a JSON string here instead of nested JSON so we have this conditional” when that could be a comment

Right, I based it on an estimate on the size of the company and how many devs they’ve had. But if a 7MB file doubled their build size and nobody noticed for 5 years, it likely wasn’t code reviewed or committed and rather just added somewhere, It’d be my guess that it’s a pretty small team, and if they’re willing to call anyone at this point anyway as they only have a few devs, and not just remove the file, they’re probably unsure on if it serves any sort of point, which usually would be clear in a commit or PR

You think they’d call up devs who left them just to ask if they happen to know about a random file?

I mean, that’s what op said happened. Literally with the verbiage of “file we found” and not “file you committed”

Ah I could see that. I took it as them not knowing where the file came from at all, so they’re just asking all the devs who would have had access at that point, which is why it was “hey do you know anything about this file?” and not “is there a specific reason you committed this file to the build?”

It sounds like they weren’t using any form of version control, so that’s definitely on them at this point

Looks great, thanks for sharing

Random recommendation, but I recently stumbled upon https://monaspace.githubnext.com, and it seems like a pretty cool approach to the whole “monospace font for dev work”

Lol the out of memory error was a joke. A reference to that two people both trying to do the same thing will fill the heap since there’s unnecessary work.

I tried to make a code joke but it failed.

As far as what are they unwilling to release? Control. Ownership of any bit of the kernel they control

kernel maintainer Ted Ts’o, emphatically interjects: “Here’s the thing: you’re not going to force all of us to learn Rust.”

Lina tried to push small fixes that would make the C code “more robust and the lifetime requirements sensible,” but was blocked by the maintainer.

DeVault writes. “Every subsystem is a private fiefdom, subject to the whims of each one of Linux’s 1,700+ maintainers, almost all of whom have a dog in this race. It’s herding cats: introducing Rust effectively is one part coding work and ninety-nine parts political work – and it’s a lot of coding work.”

It’s a whole different ballgame. I’ve written a good amount of C and C++ in my day. I’ve been learning Rust for a year or so now. Switching between allocating your own memory and managing it, and the concept of “Ownership” https://doc.rust-lang.org/book/ch04-01-what-is-ownership.html is just something many devs set in their ways aren’t willing to do.

I understand where they’re coming from, I’ve gone through massive refactors with new tech in my career. I think this approach needs to be more methodical and cautious than it is, but I don’t think they are correct in the end result. I think a memory-safe language is the way to go, and it needs to happen.

This to me is a classic software project with no manager and a bunch of devs arguing internally with no clear external goals. There needs to be definitive goals set over a timeline. If someone doesn’t agree after a consensus is reached they can leave the project. But as of now I think as others have said this is 80% infighting, 20% actual work that’s happening.