3 ms·

That way of thinking just means it'll never be fixed

gpm 12d ago
Nah, people should (and do) fix small issues as well as big issues. Lying about the scale of issues and calling them "big" when they aren't just leads to no ability to prioritize or evaluate. Incidentally someone submitted a PR for this issue about 3 hours before the first comment about it in this thread - https://github.com/uutils/coreutils/pull/14554 https://github.com/uutils/coreutils/pull/14554 (and 2 hours before this link was submitted to HN)
- sylvestre 8d ago
  Because Collin reported it in Ubuntu too :)
abirch 12d ago
"The Linux philosophy is 'Laugh in the face of danger'. Oops. Wrong One. 'Do it yourself'. Yes, that's it." Linus Torvalds
- dfox 12d ago
  The problem there is that this is exactly the class of bug that does not exist in GNU coreutils because of philosophy of that project. Non-existence of such bugs proves that the impementation is not copied from AT&T code.
- LtWorf 11d ago
  It's complicated to do it yourself when upstream won't accept your code.
7bit 12d ago
What approach would you suggest for priorisation of tickets?
- secondcoming 12d ago
  Ideally there should have been no tickets at all if all that's happening is a program being ported to another language.
  - gpm 12d ago
    This isn't a port - it's a re-implementation without any use of the original source. That's also not all that's happening. It's also making improvements like better internalization support, better error messages, and a small handful of other extensions.
    - collinfunk 12d ago
      I have had to tell them repeatedly to stop copying tests verbatim, including the original comments from GNU coreutils. So I doubt this is true, which is frustrating.
      - leni536 11d ago
        What's wrong with them using the coreutils tests?
        RichardLake 11d ago
        If they followed the license nothing. My uninformed knowledge is that the rust based rewrite is MIT, the originals are GPL, and you can't include GPL code in a MIT licensed project without making it GPL.
        leni536 11d ago
        > and you can't include GPL code in a MIT licensed project without making it GPL. Why is that? The tests are not linked to the distributed binaries. You can also distribute project sources with mixed licenses.
        heinrich5991 11d ago

gpm 12d ago

Nah, people should (and do) fix small issues as well as big issues. Lying about the scale of issues and calling them "big" when they aren't just leads to no ability to prioritize or evaluate. Incidentally someone submitted a PR for this issue about 3 hours before the first comment about it in this thread - https://github.com/uutils/coreutils/pull/14554 https://github.com/uutils/coreutils/pull/14554 (and 2 hours before this link was submitted to HN)

sylvestre 8d ago
Because Collin reported it in Ubuntu too :)

abirch 12d ago

"The Linux philosophy is 'Laugh in the face of danger'. Oops. Wrong One. 'Do it yourself'. Yes, that's it." Linus Torvalds

dfox 12d ago
The problem there is that this is exactly the class of bug that does not exist in GNU coreutils because of philosophy of that project. Non-existence of such bugs proves that the impementation is not copied from AT&T code.
LtWorf 11d ago
It's complicated to do it yourself when upstream won't accept your code.

7bit 12d ago

What approach would you suggest for priorisation of tickets?

secondcoming 12d ago
Ideally there should have been no tickets at all if all that's happening is a program being ported to another language.
- gpm 12d ago
  This isn't a port - it's a re-implementation without any use of the original source. That's also not all that's happening. It's also making improvements like better internalization support, better error messages, and a small handful of other extensions.
  - collinfunk 12d ago
    I have had to tell them repeatedly to stop copying tests verbatim, including the original comments from GNU coreutils. So I doubt this is true, which is frustrating.
    - leni536 11d ago
      What's wrong with them using the coreutils tests?
      - RichardLake 11d ago
        If they followed the license nothing. My uninformed knowledge is that the rust based rewrite is MIT, the originals are GPL, and you can't include GPL code in a MIT licensed project without making it GPL.
        leni536 11d ago
        > and you can't include GPL code in a MIT licensed project without making it GPL. Why is that? The tests are not linked to the distributed binaries. You can also distribute project sources with mixed licenses.
        heinrich5991 11d ago