This is what is great about it, the community posting hyper-creative (sometimes cursed) solutions for fun! I usually use AoC to try out a new language and that has been fun for me over the years.
> not like they changed anything significant about the product itself
They had already done this months ago, they changed the licence and stripped a lot of the code of their admin UI/object browser. So a lot of the features vanished for people overnight if they updated. This is what the OP is linked to - a fork at the point that they did this. This was work already done, feature already widely in use, they decided to take it out of what was available to the community.
So the product has significantly changed and offering had been reduced. That in addition to the stopping of publishing images - both without notice - caused a decent bit off community 'wtf'.
I am surprised Omarchy got such a large audience, DHH had already dropped an opinionated Ubuntu 'distro' - Omakub - but seemingly didn't gain popularity.
Even though I haven't used it, I don't mind Omarchy existing if it works. I had issues with omakub when I had tried it in the distant past.
That said, I think a lot of peoples criticism of DHH and Omarchy is based on their personal opinions of DHH or that they don't like that an opinionated Arch variant is opinionated, which is a bit of a ridiculous criticism too.
Not sure on this one, Reddit is arguably the worst place on the internet and has a lot of oversight, is heavily curated. Part of the reason it is so bad in fact. The pendulum just swings the other way compared to X and 4chan.
> Reddit is arguably the worst place on the internet
as someone who left reddit so long ago that they don't remember it and really does not care about it, please tell me what's worse on reddit than the constant xenophobic, transphobic and general *phobic stuff on 4chan.
phobic does not even do it justice, as it just straight up advocates for whole races or genders to kill themselves (b-b-b-but, i-i-it's just a joke, kawaii).
I really don't understand the toxicity here.. People saying that 'you shouldn't do things just for recognition/gold starts/reward/cv/etc are insane to me?
Do they have jobs? If so, to make these kinds of comments imo they should be working completely for free. Salary is a form of recognition for contribution.
Personally, adding a co-author (even if the final solution ends up different to the one proposed, but the solution is based around the findings of the original solution) is such a tiny thing to do. I think the author has a valid point to moan about this.. it isn't the first and won't be the last instance of somebody feeling their contribution to something is going unrecognised.
> I really don't understand the toxicity here.. People saying that 'you shouldn't do things just for recognition/gold starts/reward/cv/etc are insane to me?
people are acting like we are code robots who never want recognition for a job well done. even if the patch itself was inferior, the debugging effort certainly was not
> to make these kinds of comments imo they should be working completely for free. Salary is a form of recognition for contribution.
No, that’s a different scenario. Where employment is concerned, the employer and employee have an agreement where work is performed in exchange for compensation.
If you walked into a company unannounced and started doing work no one asked you to do (which is a far more accurate analogy to what happened to the OP), very few people would argue you’re entitled to compensation.
> If you walked into a company unannounced and started doing work no one asked you to do (which is a far more accurate analogy)…
This is not analogous at all. The very premise of open source involves contribution from a community of volunteers. Contributing code to a project that accepts contributions from the public is the way things are expected to work, and is about as far removed as it can possibly be from showing up at a company unannounced and expecting to receive pay.
People contribute to these projects for a variety of reasons, but at the base of it all, it’s a very human endeavor, and in lieu of receiving monetary payment for productive work, proper attribution for contributors is about as low of a bar as one can set, and should be the minimum standard.
If the “kernel contributor” badge conveys something more than the maintainers are willing to convey about a contribution, there should be something that does.
That's a good point. Patch contributor would be a nice starterpoint I think, but it smacks of 'GitHub badges'. Note that if you create a metric like that it will for sure be gamed.
This is a terrible attitude to have, some startups are cobbled together by 1 or 2 people and get off the ground, yet you are expecting them to have a team of at least 12 and additional retainer resource of lawyers and similar otherwise "they deserve to fail"?
In the real world, many businesses aren't created in the Silicon Valley by established founders and friends with VC funds, who can afford the time and cost to have all this.
Edit: To clarify, I am not saying that the things suggested are unimportant or not vital to an established business.. But that the bottom line for a brand new business with very few people involved is to survive and be stable enough to have the change of introduce backing on/off site, distaster recovery plans, paying for pen testing, security consultants, dedicated QA, etc.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hWVKeKpNQto
The channel has a few videos on it, not watched any other than this introductory one but some of the titles look interesting.
Also the introduction video above states an initial requirement of 'every PR must have a video' but it looks like that got dropped a while ago.
reply