4 ms·

> To me forking everything is a short-sighted view. Ultimately the OS authors want users of their platform because they believe they can improve the current sta

by znpy 2y ago

> To me forking everything is a short-sighted view. Ultimately the OS authors want users of their platform because they believe they can improve the current state of the art. Who needs 100+ more UNIX almost-clones? Actually this has been proven wrong in the real world. Bryan Cantrill in his talk about OpenSolaris (and its sad ending) talked specifically about how being fork-a-phobic was an issue. > Who needs 100+ more UNIX almost-clones? Who needs 100+ GNU/Linux distros? and yet here we are and 100+ GNU/Linux distros is one of the strength of GNU/Linux. Other than this, 100+ more "UNIX almost-clones" are only an issue if they are long lived. If the clone serves the purpose of showing a PoC implementation you can get the PoC reworked and merged into mainline and just kill the fork (see my other comment)

pdimitar 2y ago
> Actually this has been proven wrong in the real world. How so? TL;DR it for me and future readers, please? > Bryan Cantrill in his talk about OpenSolaris (and its sad ending) talked specifically about how being fork-a-phobic was an issue. Nobody is "fork-a-phobic", this is childish talk and completely misses the otherwise clear point that I think I presented. Again, if you can TL;DR it meaningfully people could be interested, otherwise it looks like plain old gatekeeping.
- znpy 2y ago
  > Again, if you can TL;DR it meaningfully people could be interested, otherwise it looks like plain old gatekeeping. I did, you keep missing the point. True gatekeeping is preventing people from exploring ideas by saying people should not fork. Quite literally, you’re the one pushing for the gate to be kept closed. I can’t help you with text comprehension, I’m sorry. Since you keep missing the point I won’t be replying any further, it’s wasted time. Good luck with everything.
  - pdimitar 2y ago
    You explained exactly nothing. You only said "do your homework" as if I am supposed to extract your exact meaning from a likely series of blog posts and videos. I get that you want to emerge the "winner" here but it's not going to work, HN readers are fairly well-educated. I asked for a summary, you refused it by also reaching for an ad hominem. It's very visible who is who in this situation. Good luck indeed.
    - maxbond 2y ago
      > It's very visible who is who in this situation. To be frank, I think most of us just see two people failing to communicate.
      - pdimitar 2y ago
        Ultimately, yes. When it's visible there's hostility and bad faith, I think we're excused for not putting the usual amount of effort.
        deleted 2y ago
        [deleted]
        maxbond 2y ago
        To be frank again, there wasn't really bad faith and hostility in the way you mean. You were snarky to them, and they escalated by insulting you. That doesn't really excuse anyone from anything; you both made your choices, and neither of you chose to descalate or to walk away. (To be clear, I have already read what happened, and I cannot be convinced otherwise. Any more than I can be convinced the sky is green. I'm just letting you know, because you invited the audience to pass judgment. If you feel compelled to justify yourself, just know that it's falling on deaf ears.)
        pdimitar 2y ago
        I'm not trying to convince you of anything. I have indeed invited any future reader to draw their own conclusions and they're 100% free to do so. It was not implying that I'm sure my point of view is the only valid one -- more like that people of certain character type would align with me, and others with the other poster. That was all there was to it and it was my way to disengage. Can you point out what did you perceive as snark, btw?
        deleted 2y ago
        [deleted]

by znpy 2y ago

pdimitar 2y ago

> Actually this has been proven wrong in the real world. How so? TL;DR it for me and future readers, please? > Bryan Cantrill in his talk about OpenSolaris (and its sad ending) talked specifically about how being fork-a-phobic was an issue. Nobody is "fork-a-phobic", this is childish talk and completely misses the otherwise clear point that I think I presented. Again, if you can TL;DR it meaningfully people could be interested, otherwise it looks like plain old gatekeeping.

znpy 2y ago
> Again, if you can TL;DR it meaningfully people could be interested, otherwise it looks like plain old gatekeeping. I did, you keep missing the point. True gatekeeping is preventing people from exploring ideas by saying people should not fork. Quite literally, you’re the one pushing for the gate to be kept closed. I can’t help you with text comprehension, I’m sorry. Since you keep missing the point I won’t be replying any further, it’s wasted time. Good luck with everything.
- pdimitar 2y ago
  You explained exactly nothing. You only said "do your homework" as if I am supposed to extract your exact meaning from a likely series of blog posts and videos. I get that you want to emerge the "winner" here but it's not going to work, HN readers are fairly well-educated. I asked for a summary, you refused it by also reaching for an ad hominem. It's very visible who is who in this situation. Good luck indeed.
  - maxbond 2y ago
    > It's very visible who is who in this situation. To be frank, I think most of us just see two people failing to communicate.
    - pdimitar 2y ago
      Ultimately, yes. When it's visible there's hostility and bad faith, I think we're excused for not putting the usual amount of effort.
      - deleted 2y ago
        [deleted]
      - maxbond 2y ago
        To be frank again, there wasn't really bad faith and hostility in the way you mean. You were snarky to them, and they escalated by insulting you. That doesn't really excuse anyone from anything; you both made your choices, and neither of you chose to descalate or to walk away. (To be clear, I have already read what happened, and I cannot be convinced otherwise. Any more than I can be convinced the sky is green. I'm just letting you know, because you invited the audience to pass judgment. If you feel compelled to justify yourself, just know that it's falling on deaf ears.)
        pdimitar 2y ago
        I'm not trying to convince you of anything. I have indeed invited any future reader to draw their own conclusions and they're 100% free to do so. It was not implying that I'm sure my point of view is the only valid one -- more like that people of certain character type would align with me, and others with the other poster. That was all there was to it and it was my way to disengage. Can you point out what did you perceive as snark, btw?
        deleted 2y ago
        [deleted]