davexunit

97 ms·

1. 1141.▲
   by davexunit 11y ago

   >With shared libraries, you have to trust outside developers will not change function signatures or break your dependencies in some way. With bundled libraries, the user has to trust outside developers, that didn't write those libra
2. 1142.▲
   by davexunit 11y ago

   Go in many ways is a bold step backwards in software engineering.
3. 1143.▲
   by davexunit 11y ago

   Currently, Debian is probably the biggest proponent of reproducible builds. https://reproducible.debian.net/reproducible.html
4. 1144.▲
   by davexunit 11y ago

   This is an unfortunate development. It's tough to fight against the tide of developers that simply don't care or honestly believe it is a good thing, but it's a fight that is worth it for better security and easier maintenan
5. 1145.▲
   by davexunit 11y ago

   Give me convenience or give me death.
6. 1146.▲
   by davexunit 11y ago

   >But sharing an e-book is much painless and convenient, thus can easily abused. I find it strange to see the word "abuse" used when talking about sharing. Sharing is caring, after all, not abusing.
7. 1147.▲
   by davexunit 11y ago

   Exactly. Let's not conflate sharing (making exact copies) with theft or the real meaning of piracy. It's copyright infringement, and we should be promoting works that fight against the copyright regime using Creative Commons lic
8. 1148.▲
   by davexunit 11y ago

   The FSF advocates against DRM in general as a major part of their campaigns work. Not sure why you'd suggest they are only pointing at a single instance of the problem.
9. 1149.▲
   by davexunit 11y ago

   Roughly: - Clone the git repo, build Guix, and run the build daemon - Add the Scheme code for the package recipe to the relevant module - Run 'guix build' to make sure it builds and runs - Run 'guix lint' to catch common
10. 1150.▲
    by davexunit 11y ago

    >I've never understood why there isn't a "meta-package manager" Because it's a fool's errand. The resulting mess would be the lowest common denominator of all the supported packaging tools. All of the vari
11. 1151.▲
    by davexunit 11y ago

    Currently it's a GNU/Linux package manager, but there's a working GNU Hurd port that is being finished up, and I don't see a reason why someone couldn't port it to one of the BSDs if they wanted to put in the effort
12. 1152.▲
    by davexunit 11y ago

    Yes, and I've packaged that them that way for my own personal use, but it's really annoying to deal with because I have no idea which clients work with which revisions of the toxcore git repo. Some official alpha releases would m
13. 1153.▲
    by davexunit 11y ago

    >It's a shame it can't use all of PyPI though. People often have this disappointment about Guix not being some sort of meta-package manager that can use any package format right off-the-shelf, which I think is caused by a misun
14. 1154.▲
    by davexunit 11y ago

    If the tox.chat devs would just make some alpha release tarballs I would package toxcore for Guix.
15. 1155.▲
    by davexunit 11y ago

    I took that chapter and went in a different direction, making the network a DAG and building a functional reactive programming environment out of it. Now, to go back and the propagator network and read the Scheme-Propagators source.
16. 1156.▲
    by davexunit 11y ago

    I'm also writing a Guile program specifically for the static site generator workflow called Haunt: http://haunt.dthompson.us/ I'm currently adding support for the Skribe syntax that Skribilo uses and it will be av
17. 1157.▲
    by davexunit 11y ago

    It's unfortunate that Docker uses an imperative model. A functional model would have much better cache utilization.
18. 1158.▲
    by davexunit 11y ago

    But let's say a dependency is changed. Won't modifying that RUN directive invalidate the cache for everything after it, potentially rebuilding a ton of stuff anyway?
19. 1159.▲
    by davexunit 11y ago

    Feels nice being on a computer that doesn't have Comic Sans. I just see the default sans-serif font for my system. Fonts aside, this is a nice resource. A number of good articles that I read to understand how containers work are col
20. 1160.▲
    by davexunit 11y ago

    Let's add another problem to the list: The packages uploaded to npmjs.org are typically not source packages, but "binaries" (in that they aren't source). They often contain minified JS files and no test suite, making th
21. 1161.▲
    by davexunit 11y ago

    I know several: Guix, Nix, dpkg, yum, brew, pip, gem/Bundler, composer, package.el, and probably others that I'm forgetting. Most of those I listed are bad (the exceptions being Nix and Guix that actually do it right), but npm ta
22. 1162.▲
    by davexunit 11y ago

    npm is the biggest nightmare of a package management system that I've ever come across.
23. 1163.▲
    Revised Report on the Propagator Model (2011)(groups.csail.mit.edu)

    3 points by davexunit 11y ago|0 comments
24. 1164.▲
    by davexunit 11y ago

    I don't know enough about propagator systems to know if there is a mismatch between what MJD and GJS are talking about. I do know that GJS's propagator model does more than the simple Farenheit-Celsius conversion problems (this e
25. 1165.▲
    The Art of the Propagator (2008) [pdf](groups.csail.mit.edu)

    10 points by davexunit 11y ago|2 comments
26. 1166.▲
    by davexunit 11y ago

    No, that's backwards. Microsoft and Apple and Google prevent the usage of the GPL/LGPL. Don't blame the GPL for the bad behavior of large corporations that are using their immense power to try to stop copyleft.
27. 1167.▲
    by davexunit 11y ago

    The author has expressed interest in dual-licensing, so there will probably still be options. GPLv3+ or LGPLv3+ sounds reasonable.
28. 1168.▲
    by davexunit 11y ago

    So, the free world can use this library and the proprietary world will have to develop their own if they want to use the format. Proprietary software developers get to piggy back off of tons of free software, and then when someone decides
29. 1169.▲
    by davexunit 11y ago

    >unusable license Pure bullshit. Unusable for whom? Proprietary software developers? That's the intent.
30. 1170.▲
    by davexunit 11y ago

    So we should build our most essential tools to suit the lowest common denominator? A proper programming language would allow the people that can only do basic scripting to do that, whilst allowing more advanced users to extend the system f