4 ms·

I have one literally withering on the vine. I released it today. A week ago, I released a blog post that mentioned [1] a supply chain-safe build system and lan

I have one literally withering on the vine. I released it today. A week ago, I released a blog post that mentioned [1] a supply chain-safe build system and language. Despite that post and the traction it got, the 6-hour-old Show HN is already long gone, not even on the first 10 pages. Long ago, Java had something for supply chain safety in the form of SecurityManager. It was removed. There are no supply chain-safe languages because the industry doesn't care. [1]: https://yzena.com/2024/03/what-computers-cannot-do-the-consequences-of-turing-completeness/#rig https://yzena.com/2024/03/what-computers-cannot-do-the-conse...

dvfjsdhgfv 3y ago
That post is really, really long. And
- gavinhoward 3y ago
  I try to make my marketing useful. Shame on me.
  - yjftsjthsd-h 3y ago
    It's fine for the explanation to be long, but the hook needs to be short. Edit: Also, if we're discussing https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39904895 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39904895 - it's not even a question of length, I don't see a hook there at all. If I click into https://rigbuild.dev/ https://rigbuild.dev/ and get halfway down the page then I start to see interesting features, most of which are marked as coming soon (so... not present). But I almost certainly wouldn't click the link, because your actual post just says that it's a build system and that it's proprietary, at which point I lost interest. Some people will put up with a build tool that isn't open source, but you still have to give them some reason to be interested.
    - gavinhoward 3y ago
      It is not proprietary. I think that is the real reason: if it's not FOSS, people dismiss it out of hand. Also, I was hamstrung by Show HN rules.
      - yjftsjthsd-h 3y ago
        > Note that while Rig is a commercial project, everyone, including any company, is free to try it for 30 days, and as long as companies meet the criteria for contacting me, I am open to helping them with Rig for free for 30 days. - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39904895 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39904895 > Proprietary software is software that grants its creator, publisher, or other rightsholder or rightsholder partner a legal monopoly by modern copyright and intellectual property law to exclude the recipient from freely sharing the software or modifying it, and—in some cases, as is the case with some patent-encumbered and EULA-bound software—from making use of the software on their own, thereby restricting their freedoms. > [...] > Proprietary software may either be closed-source software or source-available software. - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proprietary_software https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proprietary_software It sure sounds proprietary. In any event, yes, if you prefer I can phrase that as "I'm not going to use a build system that's not Open Source without an incredibly compelling reason".
        gavinhoward 3y ago
        No, it's not proprietary. End users are not restricted from modifying it and sharing their changes, so long as it is not for a commercial purpose. Therefore, it is not a monopoly to share and modify and not proprietary. And the fact that you and others won't is exactly why xz happened and why we might lose FOSS completely.
        yjftsjthsd-h 3y ago
        > And the fact that you and others won't is exactly why xz happened and why we might lose FOSS completely. As opposed to your approach, which... is also not FOSS. But this is a fun thread to pull: You wish to argue that it's necessary to force payment for commercial use of code. Fine; I disagree but that can be coherent. Are you doing that? Your project is commercial. Are you paying the authors of your compilers? Are you paying the authors of the open source code I see copied into your source tree? Or is it just your code that people have to pay for in order to avert the next xz?
skybrian 3y ago
I think you need to explain what it does better. There are many build systems. Why use rig instead of another build system? Here is the Show HN post: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39904895 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39904895
- gavinhoward 3y ago
  I set up a whole website for it, but I guess people don't look. The difference between Rig and other build systems is that it doesn't do anything for you. Others like to magically make your build work. I guess my problem is that I didn't emphasize the supply chain safety. That is on me. But I didn't because that part isn't ready yet.
  - skybrian 3y ago
    Yes, you have start with some advantages, or people won't read any further. Maybe next time?
    - gavinhoward 3y ago
      There won't be a next time for Rig, unfortunately. Gotta move on. I have heard lots of people say here that they want code upfront, so I put it near the top on the website. Turns out, not so much. Oh well.
  - wocram 3y ago
    Having read the 2 recent blog posts, I was interested in the release and read through most of the rig site. The hook on the rig page tells me it's an alternative to make, and geared towards C code. It doesn't tell me why this is better than make or anything else, and it doesn't look easy to use. Even if you promised the moon, it's hard to imagine anyone would jump and rewrite their codebase to try a new build system. I want a build system to take care of as much as possible for me, the package availability nixpkgs with the speed of bazel. Nix is underused because the beginner UX is atrocious, and while the package management is good, it's not as suitable as a build system. Bazel and it's offspring are underused because it requires a huge amount of up front setup, and has a half baked package management story. Since you have clearly thought a lot about this space, I hope you don't completely drop the ideas you have here.

dvfjsdhgfv 3y ago

That post is really, really long. And

gavinhoward 3y ago
I try to make my marketing useful. Shame on me.
- yjftsjthsd-h 3y ago
  It's fine for the explanation to be long, but the hook needs to be short. Edit: Also, if we're discussing https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39904895 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39904895 - it's not even a question of length, I don't see a hook there at all. If I click into https://rigbuild.dev/ https://rigbuild.dev/ and get halfway down the page then I start to see interesting features, most of which are marked as coming soon (so... not present). But I almost certainly wouldn't click the link, because your actual post just says that it's a build system and that it's proprietary, at which point I lost interest. Some people will put up with a build tool that isn't open source, but you still have to give them some reason to be interested.
  - gavinhoward 3y ago
    It is not proprietary. I think that is the real reason: if it's not FOSS, people dismiss it out of hand. Also, I was hamstrung by Show HN rules.
    - yjftsjthsd-h 3y ago
      > Note that while Rig is a commercial project, everyone, including any company, is free to try it for 30 days, and as long as companies meet the criteria for contacting me, I am open to helping them with Rig for free for 30 days. - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39904895 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39904895 > Proprietary software is software that grants its creator, publisher, or other rightsholder or rightsholder partner a legal monopoly by modern copyright and intellectual property law to exclude the recipient from freely sharing the software or modifying it, and—in some cases, as is the case with some patent-encumbered and EULA-bound software—from making use of the software on their own, thereby restricting their freedoms. > [...] > Proprietary software may either be closed-source software or source-available software. - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proprietary_software https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proprietary_software It sure sounds proprietary. In any event, yes, if you prefer I can phrase that as "I'm not going to use a build system that's not Open Source without an incredibly compelling reason".
      - gavinhoward 3y ago
        No, it's not proprietary. End users are not restricted from modifying it and sharing their changes, so long as it is not for a commercial purpose. Therefore, it is not a monopoly to share and modify and not proprietary. And the fact that you and others won't is exactly why xz happened and why we might lose FOSS completely.
        yjftsjthsd-h 3y ago
        > And the fact that you and others won't is exactly why xz happened and why we might lose FOSS completely. As opposed to your approach, which... is also not FOSS. But this is a fun thread to pull: You wish to argue that it's necessary to force payment for commercial use of code. Fine; I disagree but that can be coherent. Are you doing that? Your project is commercial. Are you paying the authors of your compilers? Are you paying the authors of the open source code I see copied into your source tree? Or is it just your code that people have to pay for in order to avert the next xz?

skybrian 3y ago

I think you need to explain what it does better. There are many build systems. Why use rig instead of another build system? Here is the Show HN post: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39904895 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39904895

gavinhoward 3y ago
I set up a whole website for it, but I guess people don't look. The difference between Rig and other build systems is that it doesn't do anything for you. Others like to magically make your build work. I guess my problem is that I didn't emphasize the supply chain safety. That is on me. But I didn't because that part isn't ready yet.
- skybrian 3y ago
  Yes, you have start with some advantages, or people won't read any further. Maybe next time?
  - gavinhoward 3y ago
    There won't be a next time for Rig, unfortunately. Gotta move on. I have heard lots of people say here that they want code upfront, so I put it near the top on the website. Turns out, not so much. Oh well.
- wocram 3y ago
  Having read the 2 recent blog posts, I was interested in the release and read through most of the rig site. The hook on the rig page tells me it's an alternative to make, and geared towards C code. It doesn't tell me why this is better than make or anything else, and it doesn't look easy to use. Even if you promised the moon, it's hard to imagine anyone would jump and rewrite their codebase to try a new build system. I want a build system to take care of as much as possible for me, the package availability nixpkgs with the speed of bazel. Nix is underused because the beginner UX is atrocious, and while the package management is good, it's not as suitable as a build system. Bazel and it's offspring are underused because it requires a huge amount of up front setup, and has a half baked package management story. Since you have clearly thought a lot about this space, I hope you don't completely drop the ideas you have here.