Apparently, contributing to OSS will make you a great developer
-
@boomzilla said in Apparently, contributing to OSS will make you a great developer:
It gave a list of analogous things for getting strong and mentioned going to the gym. Which predictably drew out the anti-OSS hysterics around here.
Damn OSS jocks.
Filed under: what analogy?
-
@blakeyrat said in Apparently, contributing to OSS will make you a great developer:
@remi said in Apparently, contributing to OSS will make you a great developer:
And that makes it a "strong focus"?
Ok; let's say it was a "weak focus".
Cool. Now let's move one and actually discuss something.
How does that change my point: that the "open source" brand stands for crummy software?
Your point is just your opinion. It's not a point because you have found one shitty software that also happens to be open source. Now, you are probably going to say "it's not one software, it's all open source software", to which I'll answer "there are also non-open source software that is shitty", to which you'll say "yeah all software is shitty but I'm talking about open source so open source is shitty". Or more probably you're going to yell at me that I'm putting words in your mouth. Whatever.
Now you're also talking about "brand perception". That does also come back to the initial comment on making overly large generalizations. Does the open source bit really matter that much in a project? If yes, then deciding about that project based on its open source status is OK. If not, then this is really like saying "I won't vote for that candidate because he's left-handed". You may hate left-handed people (hint: this is a rhetorical device, not words I'm putting in your mouth), but does that really matters for what the guy might be elected for?
-
@blakeyrat said in Apparently, contributing to OSS will make you a great developer:
Oh please. "Let's try and twist logic so we can paint Blakeyrat like a racist!" Great. This is where the debate is going?
So it's bad to use your reasoning with people but good with software?
-
@gwowen said in Apparently, contributing to OSS will make you a great developer:
Ed Gein
Who's that?
-
@boomzilla said in Apparently, contributing to OSS will make you a great developer:
So it's bad to use your reasoning with people but good with software?
it's bad to judge anything based on an attribute it has no control over.
The Git project controls their own website.
-
@blakeyrat said in Apparently, contributing to OSS will make you a great developer:
"Seny"
Aren't they the ones who make the PolyStation?
-
@jaloopa said in Apparently, contributing to OSS will make you a great developer:
@mrl said in Apparently, contributing to OSS will make you a great developer:
Be language agnostic
@mrl said in Apparently, contributing to OSS will make you a great developer:
Develop a specialty
But not in a particular language
Those aren't really contradictory. If you become a specialist in working with something like codecs or dealing with health-related information, that's not dependent on language used.
-
@blakeyrat said in Apparently, contributing to OSS will make you a great developer:
When you say "That's what's printed on the front of [a Lenovo CarbonX1]"
I'd say it is. "ThinkPad" is written
Unless "Thinkpad" is stricly equivalent to "Carbon X1" (which might be the case, as I said I don't know much about product lines, but I doubt it), you must be joking.
@remi said in Apparently, contributing to OSS will make you a great developer:
But if I ever use one hyperbole in my answers,
You didn't use hyperbole, you changed the meaning entirely, and you didn't just do it in one of your posts, you did it in several of your posts. That stupid "zoom, enhance" gag was the third time you'd done it in this thread.
I see, and to not throw more oil on the fire I won't dispute that (even though I don't agree -- but I'm ready to admit that I might have badly expressed myself). So, instead of asking for clarification, instead of saying (like I did several times, and you never answered me on these) "this is how I read your sentence, is that right?", you had to take each time my sentences by their immediate meaning (excluding context), and react on that. And when I kept doing that (according to you), instead of telling me so, you have to get angry all alone on your side until you burst into that gag, which still doesn't help anything. Are you really trying to communicate here? 'cause when you say stuff like that, really, it doesn't look like you do.
-
@maciejasjmj said in Apparently, contributing to OSS will make you a great developer:
@boomzilla said in Apparently, contributing to OSS will make you a great developer:
It gave a list of analogous things for getting strong and mentioned going to the gym. Which predictably drew out the anti-OSS hysterics around here.
Damn FLOSS jocks.
Ahem.
-
@masonwheeler said in Apparently, contributing to OSS will make you a great developer:
@blakeyrat said in Apparently, contributing to OSS will make you a great developer:
"Seny"
Aren't they the ones who make the PolyStation?
No, you're thinking of the guy who writes Dilbert.
-
@blakeyrat said in Apparently, contributing to OSS will make you a great developer:
@boomzilla said in Apparently, contributing to OSS will make you a great developer:
So it's bad to use your reasoning with people but good with software?
it's bad to judge anything based on an attribute it has no control over.
The Git project controls their own website.
Except you'd probably (but not 100% certain) make the same argument (without the explicit text on the website example) if that text wasn't there.
-
T-10 posts to ragequit
-
@remi said in Apparently, contributing to OSS will make you a great developer:
Oh, come on, you're not going to repeat the same bullshit as @blakeyrat?
Yes, because not only do they lead with it, they emphasise it with a hyperlink.
@remi said in Apparently, contributing to OSS will make you a great developer:
By that measure, your profile page has a strong focus on the fact that you were away for 192 days. Would you really think it fair that someone says this is a strong characteristic of your online presence here?
Yes I would consider it fair, because it's true.
-
OK, true story, I'm currently working on a contract for actual money to produce an OSS plugin for an OSS platform that will be given to the community.
Fuck me is it a mess. I r baffled.
So, here's something for shits and giggles to give you an idea what is considered acceptable in this world. I have a form, where semi-administrative users can create units of content. One of the boxes on this form is the title of the content.
If the content is in English only, fine. If it isn't...
<span lang="en" class="multilang">English Title</span><span lang="fr" class="multilang">French Title</span>
In some places, using the class first will break it, others it won't, because parsing stuff with regex is hard work, and you have to remember to push this content through the text filtering system where this multilanguage stuff is a fucking plugin attached to the system rather than a core feature, even though it's practically a core feature.
And this is considered good enough therefore... ship it.
-
@cartman82 said in Apparently, contributing to OSS will make you a great developer:
@raceprouk said in Apparently, contributing to OSS will make you a great developer:
Or see if there's a closed-source hobby project you can join. Admittedly, there's far fewer community closed-source projects than OSS, and they're harder to get into, but they do exist.
Wow, really?
How would that even work? Wouldn't you have to know the person who owns the product, so they can agree to let you in?
Also, most closed source products are such because the author intends to commercialize them at some point. If that happens, is there expectation you'd get a cut? And wouldn't that make you more of a business partner or an employee than mere "contributor"?
Probably but like working with someone here?
-
@mrl said in Apparently, contributing to OSS will make you a great developer:
@jaloopa said in Apparently, contributing to OSS will make you a great developer:
@mrl said in Apparently, contributing to OSS will make you a great developer:
Be language agnostic
@mrl said in Apparently, contributing to OSS will make you a great developer:
Develop a specialty
But not in a particular language
Yeah, I'm not sure what they mean by language agnostic. Knowing your way around different technologies is good, but jumping from language to language or being tossed from one programming environment to another constantly is bad.
You mean like web programming?
- SQL
- Server-side Code
- Client side code
- Design
I hadn't done any javascript in a long time and recently had a to cleanup a page and add some new functionality. I had to remind myself how to do a bunch of things.
-
@raceprouk said in Apparently, contributing to OSS will make you a great developer:
@remi said in Apparently, contributing to OSS will make you a great developer:
Oh, come on, you're not going to repeat the same bullshit as @blakeyrat?
Yes, because not only do they lead with it, they emphasise it with a hyperlink.
True, but that's still only a couple of words?
@remi said in Apparently, contributing to OSS will make you a great developer:
By that measure, your profile page has a strong focus on the fact that you were away for 192 days. Would you really think it fair that someone says this is a strong characteristic of your online presence here?
Yes I would consider it fair, because it's true.
Oh. OK, maybe I have the wrong perception about it.
For me that (both the open source thing for git, and your absence) are really "one amongst many other" and not really a defining quality, but if several other people (two is not a lot, but that's 100% of those who've said anything about it!) think otherwise, well, I can't really say that my perception is still the same as what "most people" (whatever that means...) would think. Alright, so many people do perceive git as having a strong focus on open source. Point taken.
-
@karla said in Apparently, contributing to OSS will make you a great developer:
You mean like web programming?
- SQL
- Server-side Code
- Client side code
- Design
I hadn't done any javascript in a long time and recently had a to cleanup a page and add some new functionality. I had to remind myself how to do a bunch of things.
Well, yeah, going 'full stack' is good. Learning new languages and technologies is good. Working from time to time on tasks or even projects in languages outside your comfort zone is good (and fun).
But jumping to new language every 6 months, because it's the new hot thing is bad. The whole '5 years of experience vs 5x1 year of exeprience'.
Plus, management can also be language agnostic:
: So, the new project is starting next week. Your team got it! Exciting isn't it?
: Cool!
: It's even better! You'll do it in node.js! It's a great new technology, truly groundbreaking. It's very fast, and scales great. I heard that it's also fun! Programmers love it.
: We are a C# team... we know nothing about node.js and we hate javascript...
: It's just a language. Learn it. Good programmer writes equally good code in any language.
: Fuck you. I quit.True story.
-
@mrl said in Apparently, contributing to OSS will make you a great developer:
@karla said in Apparently, contributing to OSS will make you a great developer:
You mean like web programming?
- SQL
- Server-side Code
- Client side code
- Design
I hadn't done any javascript in a long time and recently had a to cleanup a page and add some new functionality. I had to remind myself how to do a bunch of things.
Well, yeah, going 'full stack' is good. Learning new languages and technologies is good. Working from time to time on tasks or even projects in languages outside your comfort zone is good (and fun).
But jumping to new language every 6 months, because it's the new hot thing is bad. The whole '5 years of experience vs 5x1 year of exeprience'.
Plus, management can also be language agnostic:
: So, the new project is starting next week. Your team got it! Exciting isn't it?
: Cool!
: It's even better! You'll do it in node.js! It's a great new technology, truly groundbreaking. It's very fast, and scales great. I heard that it's also fun! Programmers love it.
: We are a C# team... we know nothing about node.js and we hate javascript...
: It's just a language. Learn it. Good programmer writes equally good code in any language.
: Fuck you. I quit.True story.
LOL
Well, I was considering quitting over Microsoft Dynamics CRM.
-
@karla said in Apparently, contributing to OSS will make you a great developer:
Well, I was considering quitting over Microsoft Dynamics CRM.
I had a short, yet intense, affair with it. Meaning a toxic sadomasochistic relation held together with financial blackmail.
-
@cartman82 said in Apparently, contributing to OSS will make you a great developer:
You can replace the entire article with "do stuff related to programming". Which is true enough.
"do stuff" is not satisfying. It helps to "contribute" to something however, makes it more fun. Programming without fun only creates more blakeys who hate this industry.
-
@blakeyrat said in Apparently, contributing to OSS will make you a great developer:
It's like the software is kicking him in the balls repeatedly.
All they need now is to somehow give it a sexy female body and I'll finally enjoy it.
-
@raceprouk said in Apparently, contributing to OSS will make you a great developer:
Yep. In my experience, they're usually fangames.
Mine is an original game inspired by a fan game and a TV show franchise game. Too bad it will never be finished :(
-
@magus said in Apparently, contributing to OSS will make you a great developer:
Mine is an original game inspired by a fan game and a TV show franchise game. Too bad it will never be finished :(
Well, just make it open source and let the community do it for you then
-
@arantor said in Apparently, contributing to OSS will make you a great developer:
Fuck me is it a mess. I r baffled.
Bafflement is potentially the first step toward enlightenment.
Or to burning the old code to the ground, putting it face down six feet under, and paving the burial ground over. Either is good.
-
@blakeyrat said in Apparently, contributing to OSS will make you a great developer:
Oh please. "Let's try and twist logic so we can paint Blakeyrat like a racist!" Great. This is where the debate is going?
No. I'm just pointing out that generalising from "If I see an shitty X, I'm going to call X shitty" is truly terrible, idiotic, pathetic, stupid, bigoted, fallacious reasoning.
A fallacious syllogism so utterly basic that it's incorrectness is literally the first or second thing taught in any competent "Introduction to Logic" class.
An argument of such monumental stupidity as to be beneath even your pathetically low previously-established levels.
I don't suggest for a minute that you're racist, but you are bigoted about software in exactly the same way racists are bigoted about race, and you're every bit as absolutely wrong as they are.
-
@gwowen Yes, when someone thinks a laptop brand is bad, that's the same thing as being a racist. Thanks for clearing that up, person who I don't remember who you are.
-
@gwowen said in Apparently, contributing to OSS will make you a great developer:
I don't suggest for a minute that you're racist, but you are bigoted about software in exactly the same way racists are bigoted about race, and you're every bit as absolutely wrong as they are.
When people start rioting and killing over software and hardware practices and philosophies, you'll actually have a point. Until then, know that you're painting a very ugly picture of yourself.
-
@blakeyrat said in Apparently, contributing to OSS will make you a great developer:
Yes, when someone thinks a laptop brand is bad, that's the same thing as being a racist.
That is literally the opposite of what I said, and you know it.
-
@raceprouk said in Apparently, contributing to OSS will make you a great developer:
When people start rioting and killing over software
I don't mean to suggest (and don't believe for a minute) being bigoted about software is a social evil like racism. I have literally no idea how you might interpret what I said as suggesting that (except bad faith, obviously).
Simply that, in the case of our simple-minded rodent chum, it stems from the same deficient mental process - "I see a bad X, so I say all X's are bad". Which, as I pointed out, is an argument that no-one outside of middle school should be caught using.
-
@gwowen said in Apparently, contributing to OSS will make you a great developer:
I don't mean to suggest (and don't believe for a minute) being bigoted about software is a social evil like racism.
Then why make the comparison?
@gwowen said in Apparently, contributing to OSS will make you a great developer:
I have literally no idea how you might interpret what I said as suggesting that (except bad faith, obviously).
Because you made the comparison.
@gwowen said in Apparently, contributing to OSS will make you a great developer:
Simply that, in the case of our simple-minded rodent chum, it stems from the same deficient mental process - "I see a bad X, so I say all X's are bad".
And that's a false syllogism, so call it out as such.
-
@gwowen said in Apparently, contributing to OSS will make you a great developer:
@blakeyrat said in Apparently, contributing to OSS will make you a great developer:
Yes, when someone thinks a laptop brand is bad, that's the same thing as being a racist.
That is literally the opposite of what I said, and you know it.
Yes, it is but no, he doesn't.
-
@raceprouk said in Apparently, contributing to OSS will make you a great developer:
Then why make the comparison?
Because it's apt.
@raceprouk said in Apparently, contributing to OSS will make you a great developer:
Because you made the comparison.
Never go full blakey. Have you never encountered an analogy?
-
@boomzilla said in Apparently, contributing to OSS will make you a great developer:
Never go full blakey. Have you never encountered an analogy?
As I've already pointed out twice, it's not an analogy:
Products can pick and change their own branding.
People can not pick or change their own skin color.
-
@blakeyrat said in Apparently, contributing to OSS will make you a great developer:
@boomzilla said in Apparently, contributing to OSS will make you a great developer:
Never go full blakey. Have you never encountered an analogy?
As I've already pointed out twice, it's not an analogy:
Products can pick and change their own branding.
People can not pick or change their own skin color.You're being (checks sig to make sure he gets the wording correct) stupid. He never said anything about that. He even explicitly told you that he was referring to making generalizations based on a single (or limited) observation.
-
@mrl said in Apparently, contributing to OSS will make you a great developer:
@karla said in Apparently, contributing to OSS will make you a great developer:
Well, I was considering quitting over Microsoft Dynamics CRM.
I had a short, yet intense, affair with it. Meaning a toxic sadomasochistic relation held together with financial blackmail.
-
@dkf Burning it to the ground is a good plan, if I wasn't getting paid to build more of it.
Today I had to remember that PHP considers
$output
and$OUTPUT
to be different variables. And more importantly,$OUTPUT
is a global variable that contains some magic class that's gone through about approximately 73 classes to emulate mixins and$output
is an instance of a small thing that the big thing is going to use.Said platform, for 'tis a platform, also helpfully makes
$DB
for its DB library,$PAGE
for a reference object about the current page and a few others I don't remember right now.
-
@arantor said in Apparently, contributing to OSS will make you a great developer:
PHP considers
$output
and$OUTPUT
to be different variablesYet
output()
andOUTPUT()
are the same function.
-
@pleegwat yeah, functions and methods are case insensitive, variables and constants are case sensitive.
-
@arantor Just wanted to make it clear in case any case-insensitivity advocates showed up who might have been shocked at even a single sane aspect to PHP.
-
@pleegwat I'm pretty sure there is no chance of that.
Though while double checking the case sensitivity on constants, I learned that 'in a future version' the undeclared constant thing is going away, so if you try to use a constant that you didn't actually declare, it's going to do more than a warning and treat it as a string literal...
-
@arantor said in Apparently, contributing to OSS will make you a great developer:
@pleegwat yeah, functions and methods are case insensitive, variables and constants are case sensitive.
Now that makes no sense at all.
PHP
-
@blakeyrat said in Apparently, contributing to OSS will make you a great developer:
Right; you could become an expert at how to ignore user feedback and treat them like shit. You can get a PhD in never QAing any changes ever. Great; just what the software industry needs.
So, what's the difference between that and closed-source software?
-
@gordonjcp the principle difference is that open source software supposedly has the advantage that other people can contribute to fix such deficiencies.
The reality seems to be that instead of fixing deficiencies, projects splinter and you end up with multiple sub-par products rather than a few really good ones.
Meanwhile closed source lacks the alleged opportunity for others to contribute, and instead typically will keep going all the time people are prepared to produce and accept the software (most closed source software isn't free, so it survives all the time people will pay for it, and people tend to be less inclined to pay for crap, whereas that argument doesn't exist with free software)
-
@arantor Except that that's not the whole story on either side. Only some open source projects truly splinter; others don't, or at least keep their different pieces in close-enough touch. (It seems to depend on the personalities involved; nobody actually likes putting up with arses, funnily enough!) Closed source has more of a problem with the people originally involved getting moved on and the result ending up languishing at the hands of contractors who really don't care at all. Perhaps this is more prevalent when dealing with large software companies.
IME, the best software systems seem to be the ones where small businesses feel able to build on top, and where they feel secure enough in doing so that the world won't get ripped out from under their feet. Those can last a long time and provide a lot of sustained value. Being in that state tends to require that they're not closed source by a huge company that prioritises gouging over all else, and aren't one dictatorial jerkwad's personal open-source spergdump. There's a big space between those two.
-
@arantor No, people do pay for crap. With closed-source software, companies produce the shittiest thing they can get away with selling, and you have no recourse if it doesn't work.
With open-source you have "fuck you, fix it yourself, there's the source" and you can at least theoretically get something out of it.
With closed-source you have "fuck you, we've got your money, didn't you read the agreement, no-one said it had to work" and that's all you're getting.
-
@gordonjcp Depends on what you're being sold as to whether you have recourse and/or alternatives.