1. 7

    These articles always attract people who think that being rude and hurtful to others is a political issue and most others stay away because they know that the comment threads in these are a tire fire. If you can’t work with people with differing views without royally pissing them off despite the fact that they didn’t even do anything to you then maybe you shouldn’t work in a diverse project. Go is naturally going to be a diverse project, and many of these people with differing views from you are going to be very talented. If it’s between the person who’s willing to work with others and the person who insists on making everything a political message then the person who makes calling someone “them” a big deal is going to lose every time because open source in the end is about getting things done.

    Basically when someone asks you to call them a man or a woman and you refuse and call them something else you are the person creating a needless conflict. Don’t be surprised if you are asked to leave if you do. Many dudes who are offended at their inability to misgender people would be furious if they were called a woman. It’s called treating people with respect. It doesn’t really matter if you think or don’t think they are who they say they are, you treat people as they would like to be treated or you leave them alone. Don’t expect to be antagonistic and develop a good working relationship.

    1. 7

      I don’t think that’s what it’s about for most people (that participate in an honest discussion here).

      Personally the clause that allows the Go team to police how I act outside the project makes me afraid of contributing. Someone might fake a twitter screenshot or discord message with my name on it. What if it happens while I sleep and I have no time to reply by the time the outrage train is going full speed?

      I do not want to hurt people or be rude, I know a lot of people from all walks of life, transsexual, gay, jewish, etc. I’m never rude to them because that’s counterproductive. But I also know people who are right wing and I work together with them just fine too in a professional setting. I have a huge collection of bookmarks with both left and rightwing articles, I read newspapers from both sides. I feel afraid that because of this collection, someone will inevitable post the issue “Why is this person allowed to contribute when they bookmarked this?”

      I feel like CoC’s like these push a certain kind of diversity, which favors certain groups over others, favoring US politics over what people from other nations might think, instead of having a true diversity by also inviting people from any group as long as they can behave professionally. I don’t see why a devout christian can’t work with someone who is homosexual, in fact, I am currently part of a university project where this is the case. That is what I consider true tolerance. Tolerance not of things that you don’t mind already but tolerance of things you don’t like or even hate.

      On another note, the CoC that has been employed is way to broad and “soft”. I would favor a much more stronger approach with stricter and clearer rules with no wiggle room for either side of the political divide and allows no political ideology to permeate the projects execution.

      1.  

        In the defense of the CoC it would also protect a christian who is being attacked. Libel is still possible and would still cause you a lot of problems without a CoC. In the end however the CoC isn’t acted on automatically, it is worked through with discussion. It however is correct to protect groups that are at risk of being attacked, for example if Christians were a targeted minority then it would be right and correct to stand up for them despite whatever “Political bias” that might appear to have.

    1. 9

      Good. If you’re a vocal asshole outside of the project, I don’t trust you to be able to magically turn it off and hide your prejudices inside the project either.

      And people act like this is some bizarre new thing. If I engaged in harassment or inappropriate behavior on Saturday, so much so that people knew about it…I’d likely be fired from my day job too. Nobody wants that kind of association with their project/business. Plenty of employment contracts and employee handbooks have “good conduct” clauses, and have for decades.

      Those of you concerned about this, serious question: what is an example of some behavior that you honestly think would be problematic under this new policy?

      1. 15

        Those of you concerned about this, serious question: what is an example of some behavior that you honestly think would be problematic under this new policy?

        Mainly people digging Twitter to oust someone. One case immediately comes to mind, Rod Vagg and Node.js:

        Most recently Rod tweeted in support of an inflammatory anti-Code-of-Conduct article. As a perceived leader in the project, it can be difficult for outsiders to separate Rod’s opinions from that of the project.

        The article mentioned is The Neurodiversity Case for Free Speech, which I agree with. I really don’t want to be excluded from Go project by tweeting this reasonable article I agree with. This actually happened, and I fear it will happen after this revision of Go CoC.

        1. 6

          I don’t know enough about his situation to judge, but a quick reading shows that there were sufficient complaints from contributors and other Steering Committee members to bring his resignation to a vote, and 40% of the vote was for him to resign. Generally speaking I’m opposed to the concept of “where there’s smoke there’s fire” but if a lot of people are saying they don’t want to work with you…maybe the problem is you and not them.

          (And they have in that article lists of explicit violations of the project’s policies, like discussing private moderation publicly, etc. That he wasn’t allowed a forum to answer to these charges is a flaw in the process to be sure, but he doesn’t deny they happened.)

          And the problem, from what I gather, wasn’t that he tweeted about an article, but that he tweeted screenshots of rude responses about it. He’s a leader of the project, and as such needs to think about his position.

          If thw CEO of Pepsi tweeted something on his “private” Twitter that the Pepsi Corporation felt brought them into disrepute…you don’t think PepsiCo would do something? Because they absolutely would. Like it or not, he was in a leadership position and discussed things relevant to the project’s governance in a (supposedly) flippant way.

          …but like I said above, I’m not familiar with this issue, and am just providing my opinion based on the linked article (and the things it linked to).

          EDIT: And I went back and read “The Neurodiversity Case for Free Speech”, which in my opinion is framing the argument very poorly. They seem to imply that there are people with atypical neurologies who are incapable of refraining from sexist, homophobic, and anti-Islamic speech. It’s basically saying “I can be an asshole and if it makes you uncomfortable…I have a condition!” It’s removing all agency from atypical neurologies or implying that prejudice and bigotry is an inherent part of atypical neurologirs, neither of which is true.

          It also echos the old Kuro5hin “we’re just smarter than you and if you can’t handle it, too bad” argument, which was tiresome then too.

          It goes on to say that Isaac Newton would run afoul of these sorts of things today. Well, sure. He owned shares in a slavetrading enterprise. He’s not gonna be in trouble for thinking he can transmute lead into gold, he’s going to get in trouble for talking about owning other humans. It’s a sttawman.

          There’s a difference between the kind of behavior exhibited by, say persons with Aspberger’s Syndrome and people who are just assholes. If someone with Aspberger’s truly believes he should tell women he wants to touch their boobs and “just can’t help it”…that’s unfortunate, but it’s not appropriate behavior regardless. Nobody’s banning an Aspie because they forgot to say “please” or said that some piece of code is “garbage”. Aspies can be not-homophobes too, just like neurotypical people.

          The article is seeming to say that people shouldn’t be held to any expected form of social behavior when working on a social project. It also falls into the “you have to know 100% every time without asking if someone else would be offended by what you say” which is logically falicious and not in line with what these Codes of Conduct actually say.

          In other words, this “reasonable” article seems, to me, to be attempting to throw around some absurd examples and mischaracterized strawmen, and then claim that anyone should be free to act however they please socially with no repercussions.

          That’s not how it works, or has ever worked, in any field of human endeavor.

          1. 17

            No one should be obliged to refrain from anti-Islamic speech in order to participate in an open-source software project, especially if they do so outside of the confines of the project (I’ll grant that it’s reasonable for a project to make any discussion of religion off-topic within the confines of the project). When I said that these changes to the code of conduct were a way of controlling participants’ political speech, this is exactly the sort of thing I was talking about. Islam is a system of religious thought like any other and deserves no special protection from criticism, other than that which is granted equally to all religions in a religiously-pluralistic society. If the Go project can define anti-Islamic speech outside of the project as a banning offense, then they are acting as enforcers of a specific political ideology that privileges Islam as a sacred idea. This has no place in an open-source software project.

            1.  

              Well said.

              I am more concerned about how, say, virulent your speech is. If you’re so anti-Islam or anti-Christian or anti-Atheist that it becomes obvious that you might have problems working with people of those philosophies then I would be concerned as to how well you’d function in a project that explicitly welcomes people of all (or no) faith.

              I am more concerned about consistent “women are just inherently worse at programming, it’s science!”-style posts. If that’s what fills your Twitter, I wonder how you’ll be when you review a woman’s PR, y’know?

              But you raise an excellent point.

              1.  

                If (this is hypothetical) women are, in fact, inherently worse at programming, and one thinks programming is important and should be for everybody, this means women need additional support for programming. In fact, this is the exact position I hold: I think men are inherently worse at language (reading) as evidenced by standardized test score statistics, and reading is important, and boys need special support so that they can get equal score at reading.

                I don’t hold such position wrt women and programming, but if I were, I would review a woman’s PR with more care and time so that it is more helpful.

            2. 7

              You asked for an honest concern for the new Go CoC. If my concern, to be specific, tweeting a link to The Neurodiversity Case for Free Speech and being allowed continued participation to Go project, sounds honest and reasonable, please confirm.

              Thanks!

              1.  

                I edited my comment above. From what I gather, the problem was twofold: he didn’t just tweet the article, but supposedly offensive screenshots of comments about the article; and he did it while in a leadership position of the project.

                And there were apparently many other complaints and violations of the project’s policies, so it wouldn’t appear to be as simple as “tweet a link, get banned.”

                But again, I first heard of this like 15 minutes ago.

                1. 9

                  so it wouldn’t appear to be as simple as “tweet a link, get banned.”

                  With Go, it would appear to be simpler than that. Post something totally innocuous that they don’t agree with, and get banned.

                  They banned some guy on reddit because he was just expressing his opinion.

                  (In case my own post gets deleted, here is a screenshot.)

                  1.  

                    Reddit isn’t Go, though. We have to wait and see.

                    (And he wasn’t “expressing his opinion”, he was accusing them of witch hunts before the thing was even promulgated. He wasn’t banned for his opinion, he was banned for being an asshole. Go into any volunteer organization and combatively accuse them of witch hunts and bigotry and see how long they welcome your effort…

                    If he had said “I worry that the vague language and lack of public investigation to lead to abuse of those with minority political opinions,” he’d be fine. Instead he came in accusatorily with guns ablazin and then gets taken aback when people don’t like being talked to that way.)

                    1. 8

                      Note that /r/golang does use Go CoC, so it is fully relevant here.

                      1. 8

                        he was accusing them of witch hunts

                        No, he wasn’t. He was responding to this post, essentially answering the question “what is wrong with CoCs in general?”. /u/zevdg had his own opinion, and /u/gildedlink had answered punctually to his objection.

                        It looks like he was perfectly correct though.

                        1.  

                          He accused the CoC of being used by “bigoted people…to exclude others based on superficial ideological labels…[and] to bully targets.”

                          I shortened it to “witch hunt” but the idea’s the same.

                          Again, if he had said “I fear the language is too vague and might be liable to abuse by people who wish to exclude minority viewpoints” he would’ve been fine. I you act like a jerk when expressing your opinion, people’s reactions might be based on your jerkiness and not the expressed opinions.

                          EDIT: removed some of my own jerkiness. There was no reason for it, sorry.

                          1. 9

                            Your restatement is bad because I (and I think gildedlink) am against outside clause in its entirety, and my primary objection is not vague language. In fact, you seem okay with my “Mainly people digging Twitter to oust someone… Rod Vagg and Node.js”, but I don’t see much difference.

                            Or do you think I should be banned from Go project for saying the above?

                            1.  

                              He said “frameworks like this”, he was talking about other CoCs just like this one and how they were used by other people. He wasn’t accusing these people (the Go people) of anything (although, now, I am, in case anyone is keeping score).

                              Again, if he had said “I fear the language is too vague […]”

                              He was saying what a CoC can do (and what it did do in other communities). He didn’t get a change to expands on his thoughts, or explain in depth how this particular CoC enables that phenomenon because he was banned.

                              As a related point, I am sure you realize that some of use are against the very idea of a CoC. While I have specific problems with this particular CoC (which have all been discussed here before by other people, so I won’t repeat them), my main ideological problem is with the existence of a CoC itself in any shape of form.

                          2.  

                            For the record, I appear to have been shadow banned from /r/golang as well. Not just regular ban, but shadow ban.

                            1.  

                              Any idea why?

                    2.  

                      Replying to edit:

                      They seem to imply that there are people with atypical neurologies who are incapable of refraining from sexist, homophobic, and anti-Islamic speech.

                      There is no such implication. It’s not about being incapable, it’s about being more difficult. Large text accessibility theme is not about being incapable of using small text.

                      That’s not how it works, or has ever worked, in any field of human endeavor.

                      Since humanity never made it fair for Aspies in its long history, humanity shall continue to make it unfair for Aspies forevermore. Got it. If your criteria for social change is “that’s not how it has ever worked”, there would be no women’s suffrage.

                      1.  

                        How does being an Aspie make it more difficult to not be a homophobe? Homophobia is not a symptom of Aspberger’s Syndrome.

                        1.  

                          It makes it more difficult to know what the implicit prevailing social norm is.

                          But really, that’s not what I think is the core of disagreement. You find The Neurodiversity Case for Free Speech objectionable. Got it. Do you find it objectionable enough that tweeting a link to it should constitute a cause for ban for open source projects?

                          1.  

                            Not at all. But if that’s provided as supporting evidence that I lack impartiality to do my job according to the project’s rules and had been the subject of multiple complaints on top of documented violations of procedures and policies….well…

                            Now, do you think that treating gay people with common respect is purely a social norm that we should ignore if we feel like it?

                            1.  

                              Yeah it’s also important to remember that a condition may be an explanation but it isn’t an excuse. I have ADHD and I do lack impulse control. That lack of impulse control is not an excuse to act out on others. I still need to apologize for my behavior and describe what steps I might take to avoid it in the future. It does not count as be an asshole free card. I still need to put a good faith effort into having good behavior and if I repeatedly am hostile to others then I may not be able to be involved in a group project.

                              1.  

                                This is why I am in favor of Rust CoC. “Moderators will first respond to such remarks with a warning.” Rust CoC is explicitly against instaban.

                                Go CoC is not, and above /r/golang case seems Go CoC in fact can instaban. (It is possible that there was private warning, but short time frame makes it unlikely.)

                              2.  

                                No, I don’t think so.

                              3.  

                                It doesn’t, however, make it difficult to know what one’s values are, or to act accordingly. I don’t know what social norms have to do with it, and I find this argument insulting.

                          2.  

                            And the problem, from what I gather, wasn’t that he tweeted about an article, but that he tweeted screenshots of rude responses about it. He’s a leader of the project, and as such needs to think about his position.

                            I have an honest question which I hope you to reciprocate by answering. Do you seriously believe it would have been different if just link was tweeted and “Dude, What’s wrong with your head?” screenshot was not tweeted? I really have hard time believing this. “Yes” or “No” would be sufficient. Thanks!

                            1.  

                              Well, before we go too far down this rabbit hole, we should remember that Node.js and Go are two separate projects and we should judge Go’s policy separately.

                              As for your question:

                              I don’t know. Maybe yes, maybe no. I think if the person in question has other complaints lodged against them, the scales might tip.

                              I personally wouldn’t care, but I’m not the Node.js TSC with their insider knowledge of his past behavior.

                      1. 11

                        I’m updating my “Days Since Last Code of Conduct Story” sign from zero to zero. If someone would like to write the Standard Code of Conduct Epitome, I would take it as a kindness.

                        And I’m being a little silly, but the other story’s conversation stayed pretty good and had people explaining their positions and sharing new thoughts without starting a flame war, so I hope that continues.

                        1.  

                          Once it’s been beaten to death it would be nice if at some point these are considered off topic. Not saying that moment is now, but there will be a point where people get fatigued from the wound being continually reopened by people who mostly want to stir the pot.

                          1. 9

                            Banning discussions about CoCs is only dumping more fuel into the fire while proving that the concerns of people who are against CoCs are valid.

                            At least this site makes it really easy to hide content one is not interested in, either via tags, or by using the hide button (which a few have used on this very story already).

                            I would not mind a “coc” tag, which would be more suitable than the “culture” tag used here.

                            1.  

                              Given that I can’t really tell one COC thread from another, I would be quite happy if there was a COC tag so I could filter on it.

                              1.  

                                There’s a ‘hide’ link under every headline. It will also remove comments from /newest, /replies, etc. (and anywhere they’re missed is a bug). You can review your hidden stories at /hidden.

                                1.  

                                  I’m aware. I like tags and being able to filter on them as its a one time thing and I don’t have to hide similar stories each time.

                                  1.  

                                    There are only so many discussions to be had about positions on CoCs. It becomes draining to participate, and it’s hard to stay open to new ideas when the same points are rehashed. The ability to filter on a coc tag would definitely be helpful for my emotional being.

                              2.  

                                It’s not uncommon for a forums to bar discussion after a subject becomes hotly debated for basically forever. It’s not about validating or unvalidating fears it’s about preventing a single issue from keeping a community in constant conflict. A CoC tag would probably just accelerate the problem since users who feel obligated to speak up on either side will simply search for the tag.

                          1. 11

                            overreaching Code of Conducts.

                            The author realizes that you don’t have to follow the code of conduct to use the software? Also 80% of the items on the freebsd code of conduct are illegal. the four that stick out to me that aren’t are these.

                            Comments that reinforce systemic oppression related to gender, gender identity and expression, sexual orientation, disability, mental illness, neurodiversity, physical appearance, body size, age, race, or religion.

                            Unwelcome comments regarding a person’s lifestyle choices and practices, including those related to food, health, parenting, drugs, and employment.

                            Deliberate misgendering.

                            Deliberate use of “dead” or rejected names.

                            Author basically feels that if the developers can’t get intimately involved with another developer’s personal life without consent then the author does not want to use the software. Frankly it seems like you could just create a code of conduct with the line “Thinking code of conducts are bad” and you’d filter out everyone who apparently wants to get in your grill.

                            The other rules are okayish but would rule out basically everything if applied strictly.

                            1. 11

                              Also 80% of the items on the freebsd code of conduct are illegal.

                              Code’s of conduct don’t have anything to do with law, though. An organization can block your participation in it for any reason they see fit. There are restrictions for businesses and employers, but they don’t apply to open source projects.

                              1. 17

                                Right and if you don’t agree with those reasons you don’t have to contribute or you can create your own organization. I was saying 80% of them are illegal to do as an individual. Sexual harassment? Stalking? Threatening? A lot of the CoC is basically just “We won’t enable your criminal behavior and allow you to use the organization as a way to find targets”. The 4 here are basically, “Don’t purposely be an asshole to other members, here are four ways of being an asshole that are explicitly not allowed.”. If you think Open Source means “I get to be a dick to other people and get away with it because it’s not a job” then you’re honestly doing more harm than good and should do something else with your life.

                                1. 6

                                  Oh sorry, I misunderstood what you mean by illegal. I thought you were saying much of the CoC was illegal.

                                  1. 14

                                    The 4 here are basically, “Don’t purposely be an asshole to other members, here are four ways of being an asshole that are explicitly not allowed.”.

                                    That kind of playing with definitions is one of reasons I fight broad Codes of Conduct. It’s not how they play out. Instead, those promoting or enforcing will be specific groups of people having specific, political views on everything from words to identity to societal structures, expecting the entire world to comply with those views, and punishing anyone in their immediate setting who doesn’t using whatever methods are available. Those methods range from shaming to exclusion to removing their ability to pay bills.

                                    To me, that sounds like being assholes that shove their politics down others’ throats telling them to get lost if they don’t like it. Even more so when I see plenty of people be civil without going that far in mischaracterizing or banning other groups’ means of expressing themselves. Then, a person supporting such politics shows up saying it’s just about not being an asshole. People reading that get a different impression than “no political disagreement or differences are allowed in this list of categories whose reach increases whenever we say.” I don’t expect more honesty from most promoters about the goals since subterfuge and “end justifies the means” is the norm in that group.

                                    1. 12

                                      What about it shoves politics? I would think all the points I mentioned are basically apolitical. There’s no rule against “political disagreement” within the CoC. You can be super hard line conservative and still follow these rules. I’m specifically talking about the FreeBSD CoC.

                                      1. 7

                                        It’s not really based on “politics”, but on basic respect. If you’re a conservative who is respectful of people’s preferred names and doesn’t shit all over people because of their lifestyles, you won’t have a problem. If you’re a liberal or Leftist who is super racist, anti-Semitic (hello, tankies) or constantly judges poor people overly harshly (of which there are many), you will have one.

                                        That said, if you feel that trans people asserting that we should be called by the names we choose for ourselves is somehow a political act, then yes, the purpose of the CoC is to “shove politics down your throat”.

                                        1.  

                                          if you feel that trans people asserting that we should be called by the names we choose for ourselves is somehow a political act

                                          Isn’t it? I have no problem with calling you as you like, really.

                                          And I’d like it would be the common ground of our international culture.

                                          But it is Politics. I’d argue that it’s the best expression of politics at all, as it establish a kind environment where we can confront on.

                                          On the other hand, “keep the discourse on topic or you will be banned” should be a pretty good CoC, everywhere.

                                          Now, if we can go off-topic, and you tell on a public space (say IRC or a mailing list) you do something I consider bad, you are engadging a discourse. You can’t say “I like eating people, cannibalism improve my health” and than invoke the CoC if anyone object.

                                          People should understanding that speaking in public implies a will to listen.
                                          More exactly, speaking implies a will to challenge own opinions, putting them at stake in the conversation.

                                          If you don’t want to listen any objection, if you don’t want to change your mind, why speak in the first place?
                                          Are you doing propaganda? Marketing? If so, you are the problem, not who engage with you.

                                          Also, if we can go off-topic, and you tell you like to hurt your children, I’ll comment on that, whatever the CoC. After the denounce obviously, with all the reference I can get to find you (including your email, ip, os, whatever I can get through my technical knowledge and tools).

                                          So in general, the CoC is a political tool. It could be used for good or evil.

                                          But it doesn’t fix the lack of a democratic culture of dialoge in a community.

                                        2.  

                                          Without a CoC you are at the mercy of the hidden political views of the project owners. Their decisions to ban start looking arbitrary. Either way, you deal with political views. Wouldn’t you prefer to know what they are before engaging? Worst would be spending a lot of your time on a project only to find out you get banned because you said something that was in disagreement with the owners of the project.

                                    2. 14

                                      They are too broad (e.g. large swaths of the population would violate it by with their daily interactions), which puts selective enforcement at charge. If its selective enforcement, then its just an power instrument with the rule makers at the power end, even if the contents of the CoC are all well-meaned and good in their intentions.

                                      Its not directly about the contents of the CoC, its about taking peoples moral autonomy.

                                      1. 12

                                        I think it’s reasonable to treat open source work within an organization with the same level of respect and dignity that you would expect from a job. You could get fired at a job for nearly every one of these. Using dead names even, if an employee asks you to stop and you don’t and they file a complaint against HR, HR might decide that you’re creating a hostile work environment for basically no reason. Most people don’t get fired for misconduct, so I’m going to actually say that you can’t possibly be right about that claim.

                                        Keep in mind that the responses are

                                        A private reprimand from the working group to the individual(s) involved.

                                        A public reprimand.

                                        An imposed vacation from FreeBSD Project controlled spaces (e.g. asking someone to “take a week off” from a mailing list or IRC).

                                        A permanent or temporary ban from some or all FreeBSD Project controlled spaces (events, meetings, mailing lists, IRC, etc.)

                                        A request for a public or private apology.

                                        A request to engage in mediation and/or an accountability plan.

                                        These aren’t that extreme. Sure you can be banned but that can happen in any OSS project where they can say “We won’t accept pull requests from dirt bags like you.”. In this case the things you can do wrong are at least actually laid out so that you know what behaviors to avoid and which ones to follow.

                                        1. 16

                                          Still, the CoC assumes moral authority over me, which is an no-go for freedom lovers and hackers like me. That people like you don’t exercise their own moral autonomy and fail to understand that others do (with different results) is the reason why CoC create unnecessary controversy and drama.

                                          And yes, the FreeBSD CoC makes me feel violated in my moral autonomy, and yes, the FreeBSD CoC embodies political views i do not share.

                                          1. 9

                                            A CoC has no moral authority and frankly morality isn’t even a real thing. It’s merely a set of rules that people who work together have agreed to follow while working together. You don’t have to work with them and you don’t have to use their software, but since you wanted to be on record disagreeing, I wanted to be on record agreeing with CoC and why I feel the way I do.

                                            1. 4

                                              Again, this is a strong pro-CoC statement. If they are successful in excluding people like you, they are working as intended.

                                              1. 10

                                                I was hoping to keep things civil. Perhaps there’s a more generous way you could phrase this?

                                                1. 5

                                                  Not really, given that the author has emphatically stated their disagreement with either the values motivating the rules, or the rules themselves. Regardless, such a person is a real risk to the health of the community, and it’s nice that there’s such an effective repellent.

                                                  1. 18

                                                    I’m honest about not being a feminist. I consider the concept of gender harmful (from an philosophical standpoint), but people like you seem seem convinced that not sharing your point on that makes me an bad person.

                                                    But thanks for determining i’m a hazard to community, it surely helped me to recognize the superiority of your standpoint.

                                                    1. 7

                                                      By “considering the concept of gender harmful” you are willfully ignorant to the way that society works and by effect you are a part of the problem creating inequality and fostering an environment where harassment and hate crimes can thrive.

                                                      You don’t get to invent your own reality and pretend this one doesn’t exist.

                                                      1. 16

                                                        Yeah also you can consider gender harmful without refusing to respect how other people would like to be referred to. For example I will now out of respect for your disdain for the concept of gender refer to you strictly in non-gendered nouns. Notice how I disagreed with your viewpoint but didn’t invalidate your identity.

                                                      2. 1

                                                        I don’t care about your honesty. I don’t care to have you recognize the superiority of my viewpoint; I know nothing I can say will sway you. I care to prevent you from contaminating the spaces I care about.

                                                        1. 22

                                                          You’ve and @liwakura have both explained well how you differ fundamentally, and I appreciate that. This comment is pulling that discussion into a dark place, please don’t continue on this theme casting someone as an unredeemable danger who must be eradicated. Lobsters is not good at being “Tinder, but for finding a nemesis”.

                                                        2.  

                                                          You don’t fight the concept of gender by standing on the sidelines watching those that do have the concept of gender dominate half the population. Just because you believe there isn’t gender, doesn’t mean people who consider themselves women aren’t getting the short end of the stick in our society.

                                                        3. 3

                                                          thanks, that’s much clearer. :)

                                                  2. 6

                                                    You could get fired at a job for nearly every one of these.

                                                    Depends on the job. Many employers won’t punish people who have political differences. Especially in Mid-South where we’re quite a diverse bunch of liberals, conservatives, white, black, latino, etc. The rule is that we either avoid those topics entirely to keep things civil or you better be able to take the kind of discussion you were dishing out. Essentially, we recognize those claiming disagreement is “offensive” to just be silencing their opposition. They’re trying to attack and control the other person. People still try that but don’t get far.

                                                    So, in such a truly, inclusive environment, people will be saying things that bother others since there’s conflict on a deep level. My relatives and I have worked in many such places. They’ll have heated arguments sometimes. It almost always ends up “agree to disagree” with them making up for it being nice to each other later. Sometimes people figure out who each other are underneath, permanently dislike each other, work together just enough to get the job done, and avoid one another otherwise.

                                                    People almost never quit over this sort of thing. It’s also not what most gripe about. Those griping or quitting over assholes bring up people who folks in every group agree are assholes. We wouldn’t need a CoC to deal with them. Just decent managers or owners that respond to employee complaints. If managers or owners aren’t decent, then no policies or CoC’s are going to make the work environment better.

                                                    1. 13

                                                      I really don’t understand how you got this from the CoC mentioned. There is no rule in the CoC that you must conform politically. I would be very shocked to hear that the entire FreeBSD team is not conservative. The rule is merely that you treat other people with dignity. I live in the south and every single one of my workplaces would fit this CoC save for maybe the rules around transgendered folks. Frankly even when I was a deeply religious and hardline conservative I would have no trouble following these rules. I never treated anyone less than human because they had different views than me. Furthermore that “rule” you gave is a kind of CoC and CoC’s matter once the size of the organization grows. Its very easy to fall into a tyranny of structurelessness as an organization gets larger. This is because nobody can agree on what is right or wrong or what the response should be to a problem. By having a CoC you can agree as an org what actions are against the group and what a good response looks like. If you don’t have any response strategy mob mentality kicks in and things can escalate to threats and violence. After all if someone is a huge asshole and nobody is doing anything about it it would seem natural to find a way to make them stop.

                                                      Frankly there’s nothing in this CoC that has any bias against conservatives whatsoever. Nothing in the CoC says you have to be a liberal, and it specifically protects people from false claims. Your micro-CoC actually fails to protect individuals from false claims.

                                                      Publication of non-harassing private communication without consent.

                                                      Publication of non-harassing private communication with consent but in a way that intentionally misrepresents the communication (e.g., removes context that changes the meaning).

                                                      Knowingly making harmful false claims about a person.

                                                      1. 11

                                                        Depends on the job. Many employers won’t punish people who have political differences.

                                                        This is such a disingenuous frame shift of the issue that it invalidates everything else about your argument. Being respectful is not political. Enforcing consent in interactions is not political. Being gay or tolerant of same is not political. Asserting that any effort to shift culture away from the status quo is an out-of-bounds “political” act is a cowardly way to attempt to silence those that you disagree with. You are personally guilty, to an incredibly advanced degree, of every evil thing you claim to be against.

                                                        “Politics” is the process by which humans come to consensus for shared interests. Shitting on the less powerful and providing moral or intellectual cover for those that seek to do the same is not politics; it’s craven thuggery disguised as keeping things peaceful.

                                                        1.  

                                                          Politics is whatever action affects the polis, and by extension any group of humans.

                                                          Thus being respectful is political.
                                                          Enforcing consent in interactions is political.
                                                          Being tolerant of anything is political.

                                                          In Italy we have the same kind of differences that @nickpsecurity describes, and we are used to joke about our differences a lot. And we debate harshly about many things, but usually these debates grow our relations.

                                                          As an example, I had a girlfriend that was a deeply religious Catholic when I was atheist (and rather angry at Church). And we talked a lot about religion and politics back then, without that affecting negatively the relation.

                                                          One of the best engineer I worked with voted for the worst political party we had in Italy for decades. I had the opposite view. We debated a lot. We debated so much about politics that when we had to design a framework together to under a huge pressure, we keep debating with the same style. And after 10 years in production, the framework still rocks the customers are satisfied and we can’t find anything remotely on par with it around.
                                                          Why? Because we were used to listen deeply and respectfully the other’s opinion.

                                                          1.  

                                                            I grant that being tolerant is political, and so it follows that everything is political. Which means that my point is still relevant: it’s disingenuous to dismiss concerns about behavior as “political”, as though that made it irrelevant.

                                                            In Italy, you are allowed to have those debates because the stakes are much lower: you’re less likely to die from poverty, your livelihood is less contingent upon social approval, etc.

                                                            In the United States, it’s not like that. If you lose your job, you could die. If you are systematically excluded from high-paying industries, like digital technology, your quality of life massively suffers in comparison to those who are welcomed by that industry. All policies must be considered in the context of an entrenched and reactionary old guard that dominates all other effects. Any overt attempt to improve the lives of the marginalized is treated as a threat to the old order, and rightfully so. The stakes are literally life and death.

                                                            Mr. P. Security doesn’t work in the the industry, and largely speaks from a position of willful ignorance about these issues.

                                                            1.  

                                                              In Italy, you are allowed to have those debates because the stakes are much lower

                                                              I do not know United States enough for a comparison, but sadly we have poverty here too. Our livelihood is not based on social approval, but it’s often strongly based on social relationships.

                                                              We just know we are all on the same boat.

                                                              So I don’t know if we are free to talk because we have lower stakes, or we have lower stakes because we are free to talk.

                                                              In any case, an international project should not be ruled according to the issues of a single country.

                                                              1.  

                                                                In any case, an international project should not be ruled according to the issues of a single country.

                                                                I don’t understand what this is in reference to, or what it could possibly mean in terms of what kind of governance structure or details. I was pointing out that there are cultural differences that make it easier or harder for people who are forced together to have disagreements about their values, or be able to set aside those differences in order to do something together.

                                                        2. 10

                                                          The CoC is about civility, not politics. And I can’t believe you don’t know that. So what is your purpose? Are you standing up for the right to humiliate people or be rude to them? That’s a principle for you?

                                                          1.  

                                                            Just decent managers or owners that respond to employee complaints…

                                                            Poor employees, at the mercy of their benevolent dictators.

                                                        3.  

                                                          Wait, you believe without a CoC, owners of a project have less power? An owner of a project already has views of what kind of behavior they think is good and what they think is bad. If they don’t write it down in CoC, you are still at their mercy, but now you have to guess what the hell they are thinking.

                                                          I’m not sure how a CoC increases any power they already have. You still don’t have moral agency because we live in a society where there are owners and non-owners. There is still a power differential. If you want democratic rule, then you need to fight against ownership by paper.

                                                          1.  

                                                            Even without a CoC the project owners selectively enforce hidden rules. I’m not sure how making the rules hidden is better than making them explicit.

                                                        1. 1

                                                          “Wrong” implies there’s such a thing as a right axiom…

                                                          1. 1

                                                            It’s not literally right or wrong, it’s just a matter of taste if you want literally undescribable Lovecraftian monsters in your results or not. Personally, I don’t consider them “useful”.

                                                          1. 4

                                                            It seems to me like the problems with null all stem from the fact that it is implemented as a bottom type, not the fact that it exists at all. Are there languages that implement null as a separate type, and not a subtype of all types? Is there a good reason why most languages don’t do this?

                                                            1. 12

                                                              Are there languages that implement null as a separate type, and not a subtype of all types?

                                                              At this point you’ve got option, because it’s no longer legal for a variable with type T to contain a null. Instead, to contain a null that variable must be of a union type T|Null, a.k.a. option a.k.a. maybe. There are lots of languages that do this (Kotlin, Swift, Haskell, Scala, Rust).

                                                              1. 3

                                                                Ruby, but that’s probably not what you mean.

                                                                1. 3

                                                                  TypeScript does this with the strict null checks flag on.

                                                                  1. 2

                                                                    Yes, in .NET F# is a good example of this if you’re not interoping with C#. In C# we’re finally reaching a point where nullable reference types will no longer be the default and must be explicitly declared and will have proper compile time checking. It will be a warning by default for new projects, and you can also choose to make it a compile time error if you want.

                                                                  1. [Comment removed by author]

                                                                    1. 13

                                                                      You realize it’s OK to agree with someone on one topic and disagree with them on another? A single opinion cannot invalidate everything a person has to contribute. I see a lot of people doing that these days. It’s dangerous and unhealthy.

                                                                      1. 5

                                                                        Sean Blanchfield and Johnny Ryan are the same person? Could you elaborate on that?

                                                                        1. 4

                                                                          It’s a conspiracy I tell you.

                                                                      1. 1

                                                                        I think it might be better to say. “Always be clear about your level of experience and understanding when building something as important as a database. If building a database is a secondary goal and not a primary one you might not have time to do it right.”

                                                                        1. 5

                                                                          This link is more useful: https://blog.twitter.com/official/en_us/topics/company/2018/keeping-your-account-secure.html

                                                                          By all accounts, Twitter did the right thing here. They’ve owned up to it are advising people to change their passwords. They seem pretty open about the whole thing so far. This looks like an “honest bug.”

                                                                          @tptacek even agrees with Dan Kaminsky about it: https://twitter.com/tqbf/status/992202949018431491

                                                                          1. 1

                                                                            I mean sure lets say it’s an honest bug. How was this even a possible bug?

                                                                            1. 8

                                                                              lots of frameworks will go ahead and log the entire request params hash by default, and while many will automatically filter fields with “password” in the name, not all do! Who knows if this is it, but there are certainly a bunch of ways with infinite middleware layers, dozens of intermediary proxies handling request data, etc.

                                                                              1. 2

                                                                                somebody accidentally left a log statement somewhere while testing something and it made it into a pull request would be my guess

                                                                                1. 2

                                                                                  I hope that they provide some insight into that.

                                                                              1. 22

                                                                                That’s a criminally low rate per hour.

                                                                                1. 15

                                                                                  Yeah I honestly think it should be illegal for employers to discriminate against felons. How the hell are they supposed to rehabilitate if they can’t work.

                                                                                  1. 16

                                                                                    I’ve heard the sex offender registry in Australia isn’t public; it can only be used for certain jobs (schools, medical clinics, etc.) and certain housing.

                                                                                    Criminal records and sex offender registries have a lot to do with labeling theory. It’s how countries like the US keep and grow a lower class. It’s pretty sad and really needs to chance.

                                                                                    It’s interesting how a little over 100 years ago, you really had no record. If you fucked up bad, and escaped, and fled to a far away place and could speak the language, you could start again. Today you have a permanent identity that stays with you until you die.

                                                                                    1. 8

                                                                                      It’s true. Many moons ago, I worked (as a contractor) on the project that developed (then called) ANCOR system.

                                                                                      Access was highly restricted - only select officers, only using a network that’s granted access, etc.

                                                                                      I never really saw production data, but I’ve heard from others on the project that it’s not that uncommon for the people on the register to be nothing more than a teenage boy who sleeps with his [willing] teenage girlfriend perhaps 18 and 16 or so?) and the parent(s) of the girl press charges against the boy.

                                                                                      Sure, the law should change to prevent those sort of cases, but things like Child Offender Registers (that’s the COR in ANCOR) also need to err on the side of caution when it comes to what information is made public.

                                                                                      Then again, Australia also has sane gun laws (that doesn’t mean guns are outright banned) and a health care system that actually works, so the sanity of this should hardly be surprising.

                                                                                      1. 2

                                                                                        When I lived in Melbourne, there was a gun shop at the end of my street (near the Vic Market). You can own guns in Australia; you just need to register and have a reason (sport and pests are valid reasons, defense is not). I think you’re require to own a safe and store things in a certain way.

                                                                                        Oddly enough in New Zealand, you cannot check a gun on a plane if you’re going to a shooting competition, but you can send it via courier. O_o I know a person who would just drive to Auckland instead of fly, so she didn’t have to ship her gun to a store up there. (Technically you’re not suppose to leave your car ever while transporting them, even when you get gas, but .. meh).

                                                                                        I personally think most of the US gun laws are kept the way they are because the gun industry makes a ton of money in guns smuggled into South/Central America. I wrote about it here:

                                                                                        https://fightthefuture.org/article/america-and-the-mexican-drug-trade/

                                                                                      2. 4

                                                                                        it can only be used for certain jobs (schools, medical clinics, etc.) and certain housing.

                                                                                        Never heard of that. At a glance, seems like a good compromise.

                                                                                      3. 8

                                                                                        The label “felon” applies very broadly, from murder, to blackmail, and drug related charges. So, it’s especially heinous when an application is discarded because the felon checkbox is checked, but the crime was “intent to distribute marijuana.”

                                                                                        1. 8

                                                                                          Right but also heinous because felons have no real path the rehabilitation. It’s frankly cruel and unconscionable to let someone live totally isolated from society while having to live in it. Our prison system is wretched but it’s also wretched for us to treat them like criminals after they’ve done their time.

                                                                                          1. 3

                                                                                            This.

                                                                                            If our courts didn’t require that felons wear a Scarlett letter for the rest of their life, this problem wouldn’t be nearly so wretched. The fact that no process exists to prove you’ve been rehabilitated*, and thus, eventually “timing out” the Scarlett letter is the crime.

                                                                                            *: in some cases, of course.

                                                                                          2. 2

                                                                                            There are a lot of felonies that are even worse than that. I recommend the Twitter A Crime a Day.

                                                                                            1. 1

                                                                                              I think the real question becomes “how / how often are these laws charged, and convicted?” But, yes, your point stands. :)

                                                                                      1. 4

                                                                                        I believe that there’s a very real chance that a reëvaluation of scientific research — particularly the social sciences, which are so soft as to border on pseudoscience to begin with — in light of this new understanding is very likely to yield unexpected & revolutionary results.

                                                                                        1. 7

                                                                                          The social sciences are not “so soft as to border on pseudoscience”. Yes P-Hacking and over reliance on p-values are an issue, but they’re an issue unilaterally. It matters just as much in physics as it does in social science. The idea that social sciences are somehow less rigorous than say physics is I think fallacious and without merit. Physics is still ultimately rooted in experimental evidence which is statistical in nature. You realize you’re discrediting an entire set scientific fields with literally no evidence and likely with very little knowledge of the subject. It’s not like there’s been literally no replication in the social sciences. What an absolutely absurd claim.

                                                                                          1. 6

                                                                                            I have to agree with @bargap here. Physics is a poor example to hold up against the social sciences. Physics results require a level of significance that is mind boggling. Of course those piddly experimentalists do get things wrong sometimes. But a better comparison is perhaps life sciences. The basic problem is that the system is so complex that it is hard to figure out all the moving parts and make sure you’ve bolted down all but a few.

                                                                                            There is a running joke about “Doctors recommend … “ (take your pick - babies should sleep on their back/belly, this food is bad/good for you, this causes/cures cancer, this causes/does not cause autism …) precisely because we’ve been burned so many times by studies that just did not have enough N, or more insidiously (and forgivably), had a biased N.

                                                                                            Social sciences study PersONS which are much more complex than protONS or electrONS but their tooling and standards are, paradoxically, lower, not higher and society seems to have an expectation of what the right answer should be, allowing social biases to play a disproportionate role in biasing reports in these fields.

                                                                                            1. 4

                                                                                              If you look in spaces like chemistry or spintronics you’ll find a lot of papers that people end up not being able to reproduce because it turned out that the machine that the writers were using had issues.

                                                                                              In situations where there are only 5 or so machines in the world that can do an experiment, if 1 of them has an issue then it’s not always easy to validate. Especially when the research methodology is “cartesian product of every material with every technique => see if something happens”. And even absent that, people’s interpretations of measurements change over time too!

                                                                                              Agree that people are harder to study, especially in long term stuff. But we don’t do many physics experiments over 20 years either! It’s mainly that time is hard, and preconditions are hard to set up. You can totally do experiments in social sciences over a small time scale correctly.

                                                                                              1. 5

                                                                                                Instead of comparing the foundations of physics to the edges of social sciences you should be considering the edges of physics, after all it doesn’t make sense to compare things which have a thousand years of replication to ones with tens of years. We’re still not sure that dark matter actually exists. Classical bias risk is pervasive in theoretical physics and is a constant threat.

                                                                                                The analogy is instead saying “Medical science borders on pseudoscience, we should cast doubt on the entire field including claims such as “Arsenic is poisonous” because some of the newer claims on cancer haven’t yet been replicated”.

                                                                                                To be entirely clear you haven’t been burned by science, you’ve been burned by irresponsible reporting which has confidence from a single study.

                                                                                                This article is also relevant here https://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2016/03/study-that-undercut-psych-research-got-it-wrong/

                                                                                                The concession is that there hasn’t been enough replication but a recent study reported on by ars which I don’t have on hand right now says that the replication rate of social science studies were around 70%, which is yeah not great but it’s hardly pseudoscience.

                                                                                                1. 3

                                                                                                  To be entirely clear you haven’t been burned by science, you’ve been burned by irresponsible reporting which has confidence from a single study.

                                                                                                  That’s a classic defense. “I never said that! They blew the press release all out of proportion”. Sometimes it is true.

                                                                                                  I know of many papers where inferences and conclusions are not warranted by the data and have seen this in different fields of study. I infer that this is common human behavior to game a the system that rewards visibility and volume.

                                                                                                  1. 5

                                                                                                    You have conveniently dodged the main premise of my argument. Sure I’ll concede there are plenty of bad actors, but they aren’t magically condensed in the social sciences.

                                                                                                    1. 2

                                                                                                      The social sciences are definitely one of the areas where bad studies are harder to root out because of lower standards of rigor combined with the complexity of the subject and the fact that “truthiness” is easier to determine and therefore forms an extra social pressure not to challenge a particular study if it conforms to current social biases.

                                                                                                      1. 3

                                                                                                        I don’t think its actually reasonable to say that the newest physics are any more rigorous, any less complex, or any less rife with bias. They both use studies with statistical evidence so they both have a lot of rigor but it’s hard to beat replication. They both are very very complex. They both have lots and lots of human bias, from a bias towards classicalism, conservativism, anti-classicalism and modernism. That doesn’t mean that either of them are anywhere near pseudoscience. The claim is just uninformed.

                                                                                          1. 3

                                                                                            A lot of git’s value is circumvented when we all rely on GitHub. I’ve been self-hosting for years and recommend others do the same. cgit is great, but if I was to deploy my server again. I would also look at stagit.

                                                                                            1. 3

                                                                                              But it goes the other way too. Github (and Gitlab/BitBucket to some extent) really promoted the “social coding” … the ability to fork, edit, commit and pull request back into a project has really sped up development of a lot of projects; allowing developers to start contributing to projects to minor bug fixes all the way up to large feature branches.

                                                                                              I wish this was built into the protocol itself; to allow a means to offer contributions to custom/federated domains in a standards compliant way. Fossil at least provides its own standard web interface and issue tracker.

                                                                                              I suppose you could run your own version of Gitlab or Gogs and allow limited signups only for project forks …

                                                                                              1. 7

                                                                                                It actually kind of is built into the “protocol” (well, into git). It’s why git request-pull exists and why github decided to call these things “pull requests” when they’re more usually merge requests.

                                                                                                1. 4

                                                                                                  Yes I agree. I think we either need to write an activitypub implementation for issue tracking / wiki / project management or have some good set of tools for bugs/wiki/pm for git that are all bundled together under one project that are accessible from a web interface like cgit.

                                                                                                  1. 3

                                                                                                    I’ve taken to using http://mrzv.org/software/artemis for issue tracking. It just uses a maildir for each issue (identified by hashes), stored in a .issues directory. Metadata (status, assignee, whatever) are just headers of the ‘root’ messages of the maildirs.

                                                                                                    I’ve made a few convenience scripts around this, e.g. an EDITOR script which opens emacsclient in an email-composing mode. Generating Web pages from these is easy enough using MHonArc, although it’s not the prettiest ;)

                                                                                                    1. 3

                                                                                                      I haven’t tried Artemis myself but anything like this that embeds issues in the repo itself (and as regular files, so it’ll work across VCS’) is a good thing IMO.

                                                                                                      The missing part is usually a web viewer (or editor!) for issues, so that non-dev staff can make use of it too.

                                                                                                2. 2

                                                                                                  I also self-host git and really like klaus.

                                                                                                  1. 1

                                                                                                    I would also look at stagit

                                                                                                    Stagit looks pretty nice. I’ve been using git2html, but the filesize gets a bit ridiculous. I’ve ended up skipping all commits except HEAD, which is obviously not ideal.

                                                                                                  1. 2

                                                                                                    Of course it’s not okay. It creates an incentive to shoot people so that you can gather evidence on them without due process. Can’t get a warrant but you think they’re guilty? Shoot them then use their fingerprint to meet your quota and bob’s your uncle.

                                                                                                    1. 4

                                                                                                      This should instead be titled “Scrum alone won’t fix your toxic work environment”. Processes and software can’t fix conflict though they can help you manage it, but you have to actually try to manage the conflict. The first line screams of completely unmanaged conflict.

                                                                                                      “Because all product decision authority rests with the “Product Owner”, Scrum disallows engineers from making any product decisions and reduces them to grovelling to product management for any level of inclusion in product direction.”.

                                                                                                      Their response The nature of computer programming basically aims for eschewing process as much as possible

                                                                                                      “The lightest, leanest process you can get away with is always best — and you will be amazed how very little process you really need.”

                                                                                                      I think the author doesn’t really understand conflict, doesn’t really understand processes and thinks that if you get rid of processes that the conflict will magically resolve.

                                                                                                      1. 4

                                                                                                        I think the elephant in the room that this article doesn’t directly address is “Do the programs you write have many types of data which should never be substituted?”. If all the types in your program really are strings, and you’re just moving text around you would likely be hindered by types. If by contrast you have many different kinds of integer that should not be mixed like weight and account balance you might really benefit from stricter types.

                                                                                                        1. 4

                                                                                                          If all the types in your program really are strings, and you’re just moving text around you would likely be hindered by types.

                                                                                                          I’ve yet to work on a useful program where the data’s representation as a “string” was the highest level of meaning that could be assigned to that data. As soon as you get past writing a toy you will start to have to differentiate between what different string values mean, and then we are talking about types–and arguably at precisely the point where we can start to leverage the power of a (good) type system. Speaking as someone who writes Clojure as his day job, it’s clear to me that this is why core.typed exists, and why there is so much activity around clojure.spec (and schema before it)–it’s obvious that “everything is a string” (or in the case of Clojure, “everything is a map”) isn’t good enough to represent the kind of data we work with as professional programmers (and the jury is out on whether or not clojure.spec is up to the task).

                                                                                                          So while that’s not to suggest that we always need a sophisticated type system–or that we aren’t sometimes hindered when forced to use a type system like Java’s–I think it’s fair to say that it is rarely, if ever, the case that we don’t have more meaning assigned to the values in our program above and beyond than their encoding as low-level storage representations.

                                                                                                          1. 1

                                                                                                            I think another good example of this situation is algorithmic code - the structure one would like to express (e.g. sortedness, sub-solution optimality, graph acyclicity) is often beyond what the type system can represent. You end up with numeric arrays / matrices / edge lists without much further type structure.

                                                                                                            At the opposite end is either unit-heavy code (as in your example) or structure-heavy code (e.g. configs / ASTs / requests), both of which significantly benefit from what a typical type system offers.

                                                                                                            1. 1

                                                                                                              If all the types in your program really are strings, and you’re just moving text around you would likely be hindered by types.

                                                                                                              Could you give an example of such a program? I deal with strings relatively often, but the bulk of the logic in my programs (client-side JavaScript) benefit quite a bit from types (via TypeScript).

                                                                                                            1. 2

                                                                                                              Hello! Welcome to the world of Nekoyume. Please set your own private key and input that in the form below so that you can start game right know. Private key is a password that identify you. Please make this unique.

                                                                                                              What?

                                                                                                              There’s no description or anything.

                                                                                                              1. 2

                                                                                                                Kind of weird to link directly to the demo…

                                                                                                                https://nekoyu.me/ the index has descriptions.

                                                                                                              1. 6

                                                                                                                I use Fossil for all of my personal projects anymore. I don’t like that Github has a near-monopoly, and @ work we use mercurial not git, so I never learned the insanity that is the git model. I understand there are reasons for the insanity, but still.

                                                                                                                1. 6

                                                                                                                  Last year I switched our studio’s VCS from git to mercurial because of how Hg manages “changeset evolution”. It seems to me that Hg has the upper hand in terms of innovation and advancing the conceptual model for VCS. One year later I’m quite happy: Hg feels easier to use, especially in unusual situations. The only thing I miss from git is automatic merge+commit on pull, while Hg still asks you to review and commit the merge.

                                                                                                                  1. 2

                                                                                                                    How big is your team at work?

                                                                                                                    We’re only about 10 at mine, and we used to use Mercurial, but little by little hg usage eroded until it’s just me now yelling at (Amazon) clouds.

                                                                                                                    1. 4

                                                                                                                      Facebook uses it and Google is starting to as well. Both orgs have thousands of engineers.

                                                                                                                      1. 1

                                                                                                                        Only 2 of us now :( Government budgets hurt. We still love it tho.

                                                                                                                        I keep thinking about moving to fossil @ work too, but HG works so well for us, no sense in messing with it.

                                                                                                                      2. 2

                                                                                                                        cgit + bugseverywhere + moinmoin would get you there too if you did prefer git.

                                                                                                                        1. 3

                                                                                                                          Yes, there are loads of options available, none of which is as easy as fossil ui

                                                                                                                          1. 0

                                                                                                                            That’s an extremely subjective statement. Also good luck using anything more robust with fossil, you’re locked in.

                                                                                                                            1. 3

                                                                                                                              Locked in? Import and export from git: http://fossil-scm.org/index.html/doc/trunk/www/inout.wiki

                                                                                                                              Plus it’s BSD-2 clause licensed, which is the exact opposite of lock-in.

                                                                                                                              Subjective? Maybe….. But this is why. think no:

                                                                                                                              • Having to learn 3(+?) different tools, vs. 1 tool.
                                                                                                                              • 3+ different processes and configuration to get right, and to make it all interoperate well together.
                                                                                                                              • The internal structures are well documented.
                                                                                                                              • Fossil is a statically linked executable, available compiled for mac,win,linux from their site.

                                                                                                                              Installation of git + friends will be at best an apt-get or yum install away, but Windows is probably a mess to install all of it (granted git itself isn’t so bad anymore on windows)

                                                                                                                              That said, We can just agree to disagree and call it a day. I recognize Git + friends is perfectly fine if you want to live that way.

                                                                                                                              1. 1

                                                                                                                                I mean if you want to run fossil with a different web client, or a different issue tracker.

                                                                                                                      1. 2

                                                                                                                        jokes on them, I’m one of them millennial cord cutters and I already have only one choice for internet.

                                                                                                                        1. 1

                                                                                                                          There’s a lot of conflation between ‘git’ and ‘github’ here.

                                                                                                                          Point 3 is utterly bogus. If your needs are so specific, use git, not github.

                                                                                                                          ‘Setting up a website for a project to use Git requires a lot more software, and a lot more work, than setting up a similar site with an integrated package like Fossil.’

                                                                                                                          I run a git server at home. All I need is ssh. What’s ‘a lot of software’ about that?

                                                                                                                          1. 4

                                                                                                                            The part you quoted talks about providing a whole website for the project, not just repository access.

                                                                                                                            Fossil seems to have a built-in web server, which provides access to the repository, tickets and wiki. The closest thing distributed with Git is GitWeb, which requires Perl and a web server speaking CGI. It only allows you to browse the repository. For anything else you need even more third-party software like Gitea for example.

                                                                                                                            So setting up a whole website for a project using Git indeed…

                                                                                                                            requires a lot more software, and a lot more work, than setting up a similar site with an integrated package like Fossil.

                                                                                                                            1. 1

                                                                                                                              Fair enough, but adding JIRA or something is simple enough. What the author is saying is: ‘I want fossil’, which is fine, but isn’t a good reason not to use git.

                                                                                                                              1. 1

                                                                                                                                cgit works fine. Often things aren’t packaged together on purpose within linux. This doesn’t mean you can only use gitweb. Also you can send patches over email if you choose. It’s not really fair to call it third party software since literally all of it including git is third party software.

                                                                                                                              2. 1

                                                                                                                                I agree with you about the conflation between git and Github. Github doesn’t play very well with cmd line git. you can’t send/receive patches for example. For lots of people git == Github, they are interchangeable, you and I know differently.

                                                                                                                                like @seschwar said, you seem to have missed the first part of the sentence, “website for a project”. This requires more than ssh and git. Fossil is a statically linked binary that includes it all. And with the fossil ui command you get the entire website and all functionality locally as well, and it will all seamlessly sync with as many other copies of the repo as you want, the server is not special in any way, except that it exists at a safe, well-known address and becomes the main published repo.

                                                                                                                              1. 2

                                                                                                                                I’m so happy they also included a text transcript. Very cool