5 ms·

My comment is not directly related to Morpheus Linux. The first link on the page "Keep it simple" directs to "http://suckless.org/philosophy" http://suckless.o

My comment is not directly related to Morpheus Linux. The first link on the page "Keep it simple" directs to "http://suckless.org/philosophy" http://suckless.org/philosophy" whose motto is "software that sucks less". I've never contributed any software to the open-source community (I hope I will one day), but I find it fairly unfair to all those devs that spent years making open source tools that are used by every single sysadmin to say that you want to write "software that sucks less". You might want to write software that is "better" but not that "sucks less". Saying a tool sucks in hindsight is way easier than writing a tool that doesn't suck in the first place. After all, you probably learned how to write a tool that "sucks less" thanks to all of those other developers that made those mistakes for you. So, although I do agree with some statements made in the "philosophy" part of the website, like this one: > Most hackers actually don’t care much about code quality. Thus, if they get something working which seems to solve a problem, they stick with it. If this kind of software development is applied to the same source code throughout its entire life-cycle, we’re left with large amounts of code, a totally screwed code structure, and a flawed system design. This is because of a lack of conceptual clarity and integrity in the development process. I do think the domain name and mottos are poorly chosen.

farhaven 11y ago
"sucks less" is a nod to the fact that all software sucks in some regard. Yes, also the software written by the suckless people. (It's also the motto of the mutt email client) Acknowledging that there is something wrong is the first step to making better things. Also, IMHO "We aim to do stuff that sucks less" is a bit more humble than saying "We aim to write better software", but in the end, both probably mean the same thing.
- gouggoug 11y ago
  I see your point of view. "sucks less" has a negative connotation, but I can see the message delivered is not necessarily negative.
- Avshalom 11y ago
  Maybe, but I'm fairly sure abrasiveness was meant in the case of the suckless community.
gouggoug 11y ago
Lots of down votes, but very few arguments. I'll put it another way: Would you go to your co-worker and tell him/her/it, "Hey, I'm going to write the same software you did, but I'm going to write in a way that sucks less"? I wouldn't. But that's me.
- striking 11y ago
  It's honestly just marketing copy. And the case of the coworker vs. the website: There's a difference. If a coworker said that to me, I'd have words to say back (unless it really does suck. I'd be willing to hear a well-reasoned argument or admit my own flaws). The website though? Unlike a coworker, I never have to see a website more than once. A coworker saying that directly to me sounds like an attack on my character and my ability to write code. A website published for everyone to see is just a critique of code. Finally, I can close a website, turn off my computer, and take a walk after being offended (as I do often). I cannot do the same with a coworker. Knowing I can't avoid or dismiss a person like that means that I have to confront them. And that ends really, really poorly. The idea of code sucking more or less is totally subjective. That website is purely opinion. I like to use dwm on my Desktop computer because it's really lightweight and easy to set up. Others prefer a shinier and less confusing system like GNOME Shell or something. Essentially, they are presenting one side of the argument. They want to show the world why trying to minimize code is a good thing (and only good; there is a necessary bias in debate). And you are choosing to be offended by the idea that someone out there in the world thinks someone else's code sucks. It seems like you just have a personal vendetta against suckless, and it seems you fully understand that and choose to make HN your soapbox regardless of whether or not it is on topic. That's why you're getting downvotes. Someone came up with a cool idea, and you nitpick on something so miniscule it's incredible, rather than discussing the pros and cons of the concepts themselves. I don't really understand your position.
  - gouggoug 11y ago
    > The website though? Unlike a coworker, I never have to see a website more than once. A coworker saying that directly to me sounds like an attack on my character and my ability to write code. A website published for everyone to see is just a critique of code. > Finally, I can close a website, turn off my computer, and take a walk after being offended (as I do often). I cannot do the same with a coworker. Knowing I can't avoid or dismiss a person like that means that I have to confront them. And that ends really, really poorly. > The idea of code sucking more or less is totally subjective. That website is purely opinion. I like to use dwm on my Desktop computer because it's really lightweight and easy to set up. Others prefer a shinier and less confusing system like GNOME Shell or something.* This misses the point. Be it in real life, or on a website, "Suckless" is just, subjectively, very negative, and I pointed it out. Obviously not everybody thinks it is, and that's fine. > And you are choosing to be offended by the idea that someone out there in the world thinks someone else's code sucks. Offended might be a bit of a strong term, that I did not use. I did, however, say that I think the domain name and motto are poorly chosen. > It seems like you just have a personal vendetta against suckless Not at all. And although I've never tried their software, I'm sure it's great. > and it seems you fully understand that and choose to make HN your soapbox regardless of whether or not it is on topic. I believe HN is a place to express opinions, constructive criticism. I don't think my comment falls out of that scope. It so happens that the first link on that website pointed to a website whose domain name stuck out for me. I then just stated my opinion about what I read on said website. > Someone came up with a cool idea, and you nitpick on something so miniscule (sic) it's incredible, rather than discussing the pros and cons of the concepts themselves. Whether or not this is a cool idea (which I think it is) has nothing to do with my first comment. I even specified my comment was not directly related to Morpheus Linux. > That's why you're getting downvotes. Let it be said that I was merely pointing out the lack of arguments from down votes. I'm glad you took the time adding a comment. > I don't really understand your position. That's ok, someone's always wrong on the internet.
stonogo 11y ago
> I find it fairly unfair to all those devs that spent years making open source tools that are used by every single sysadmin to say that you want to write "software that sucks less". I am one of those systems administrators. The fact that my job exists at all is 100% down to the fact that software sucks. If it didn't suck, systems would administer themselves. It does nobody any good to pretend otherwise out of some kind of abstract politeness.
- gouggoug 11y ago
  That's a nice strawman. My argument is not that software doesn't suck, nor that we should pretend it doesn't. However, recognizing that other's people work, upstream of yours, contributed to the "betterness/sucklessness" of yours is, IHMO, important. But this is purely subjective (therefore the IHMO). Now, the /philosophy page of suckless.org objectively disregards this; by not acknowledging it in the first place.
  - stonogo 11y ago
    That's because it's wholly irrelevant. The software sucks. This is the whole of the message. It's not important why it can be done better if nobody ever does it better. It's ironic you're complaining about straw men while criticizing a technology project because you don't like the way they talk about technology, completely ignoring the technology itself. It's an unproductive gripe, unlikely to better anyone's situation.

farhaven 11y ago

"sucks less" is a nod to the fact that all software sucks in some regard. Yes, also the software written by the suckless people. (It's also the motto of the mutt email client) Acknowledging that there is something wrong is the first step to making better things. Also, IMHO "We aim to do stuff that sucks less" is a bit more humble than saying "We aim to write better software", but in the end, both probably mean the same thing.

gouggoug 11y ago
I see your point of view. "sucks less" has a negative connotation, but I can see the message delivered is not necessarily negative.
Avshalom 11y ago
Maybe, but I'm fairly sure abrasiveness was meant in the case of the suckless community.

gouggoug 11y ago

Lots of down votes, but very few arguments. I'll put it another way: Would you go to your co-worker and tell him/her/it, "Hey, I'm going to write the same software you did, but I'm going to write in a way that sucks less"? I wouldn't. But that's me.

striking 11y ago
It's honestly just marketing copy. And the case of the coworker vs. the website: There's a difference. If a coworker said that to me, I'd have words to say back (unless it really does suck. I'd be willing to hear a well-reasoned argument or admit my own flaws). The website though? Unlike a coworker, I never have to see a website more than once. A coworker saying that directly to me sounds like an attack on my character and my ability to write code. A website published for everyone to see is just a critique of code. Finally, I can close a website, turn off my computer, and take a walk after being offended (as I do often). I cannot do the same with a coworker. Knowing I can't avoid or dismiss a person like that means that I have to confront them. And that ends really, really poorly. The idea of code sucking more or less is totally subjective. That website is purely opinion. I like to use dwm on my Desktop computer because it's really lightweight and easy to set up. Others prefer a shinier and less confusing system like GNOME Shell or something. Essentially, they are presenting one side of the argument. They want to show the world why trying to minimize code is a good thing (and only good; there is a necessary bias in debate). And you are choosing to be offended by the idea that someone out there in the world thinks someone else's code sucks. It seems like you just have a personal vendetta against suckless, and it seems you fully understand that and choose to make HN your soapbox regardless of whether or not it is on topic. That's why you're getting downvotes. Someone came up with a cool idea, and you nitpick on something so miniscule it's incredible, rather than discussing the pros and cons of the concepts themselves. I don't really understand your position.
- gouggoug 11y ago
  > The website though? Unlike a coworker, I never have to see a website more than once. A coworker saying that directly to me sounds like an attack on my character and my ability to write code. A website published for everyone to see is just a critique of code. > Finally, I can close a website, turn off my computer, and take a walk after being offended (as I do often). I cannot do the same with a coworker. Knowing I can't avoid or dismiss a person like that means that I have to confront them. And that ends really, really poorly. > The idea of code sucking more or less is totally subjective. That website is purely opinion. I like to use dwm on my Desktop computer because it's really lightweight and easy to set up. Others prefer a shinier and less confusing system like GNOME Shell or something.* This misses the point. Be it in real life, or on a website, "Suckless" is just, subjectively, very negative, and I pointed it out. Obviously not everybody thinks it is, and that's fine. > And you are choosing to be offended by the idea that someone out there in the world thinks someone else's code sucks. Offended might be a bit of a strong term, that I did not use. I did, however, say that I think the domain name and motto are poorly chosen. > It seems like you just have a personal vendetta against suckless Not at all. And although I've never tried their software, I'm sure it's great. > and it seems you fully understand that and choose to make HN your soapbox regardless of whether or not it is on topic. I believe HN is a place to express opinions, constructive criticism. I don't think my comment falls out of that scope. It so happens that the first link on that website pointed to a website whose domain name stuck out for me. I then just stated my opinion about what I read on said website. > Someone came up with a cool idea, and you nitpick on something so miniscule (sic) it's incredible, rather than discussing the pros and cons of the concepts themselves. Whether or not this is a cool idea (which I think it is) has nothing to do with my first comment. I even specified my comment was not directly related to Morpheus Linux. > That's why you're getting downvotes. Let it be said that I was merely pointing out the lack of arguments from down votes. I'm glad you took the time adding a comment. > I don't really understand your position. That's ok, someone's always wrong on the internet.

stonogo 11y ago

> I find it fairly unfair to all those devs that spent years making open source tools that are used by every single sysadmin to say that you want to write "software that sucks less". I am one of those systems administrators. The fact that my job exists at all is 100% down to the fact that software sucks. If it didn't suck, systems would administer themselves. It does nobody any good to pretend otherwise out of some kind of abstract politeness.

gouggoug 11y ago
That's a nice strawman. My argument is not that software doesn't suck, nor that we should pretend it doesn't. However, recognizing that other's people work, upstream of yours, contributed to the "betterness/sucklessness" of yours is, IHMO, important. But this is purely subjective (therefore the IHMO). Now, the /philosophy page of suckless.org objectively disregards this; by not acknowledging it in the first place.
- stonogo 11y ago
  That's because it's wholly irrelevant. The software sucks. This is the whole of the message. It's not important why it can be done better if nobody ever does it better. It's ironic you're complaining about straw men while criticizing a technology project because you don't like the way they talk about technology, completely ignoring the technology itself. It's an unproductive gripe, unlikely to better anyone's situation.