Idiots make their build process reliant on someone else's server, bitch when it goes down
-
The repo holding Docker went down for a few hours.
Turns out a bunch of stupid morons have build processes that re-download Docker every goddamned time they build, and it got them all gummed up, and now they're bitching about it on GitHub.
Example comment:
Docker repo maintainers. You need:
Automatic testing on changes
Healthcheck of your repo
basically monitoring and alarmsI hope this never happens again. Docker was causing production test and deployment issues here (on TravisCI) with this although I'm not using a single Docker container in production.
So you're the moron who set up your continuous integration server to rely on a package you don't even use, but let's give Docker advice on how to run their shit. Because obviously you're the expert master genius man.
I never knew Docker was a 2 tier organisation where the user base is split between the haves and have nots. Surly installing docker is global concern for everyone using the software and therefore the support that "commercial" people get should also apply to the community. A paid tier to an organisation is a good way to make money but that should go beyond basics, like being able to install your software.
Waaah! People who pay them money get better support! Waaah!
-
At least Travis supports caching, which is better than nothing.
-
@blakeyrat If you need your build process to work every minute of every day 100% of the time, then don't rely on 3rd party services. Simple as that.
-
@blakeyrat said in Idiots make their build process reliant on someone else's server, bitch when it goes down:
Surly installing docker
I install Docker the normal way, thanks.
-
Another variation of the left-pad saga, idiots blaming others for their own stupid workflow,
-
@WPT said in Idiots make their build process reliant on someone else's server, bitch when it goes down:
Another variation of the left-pad saga, idiots blaming others for their own stupid workflow,
The difference is that the left-pad users actually used left padding.
-
@ben_lubar that makes them even more stupid
-
@WPT What is this left-pad thing?
-
@Captain said in Idiots make their build process reliant on someone else's server, bitch when it goes down:
What is this left-pad thing?
-
@cartman82 said in Idiots make their build process reliant on someone else's server, bitch when it goes down:
If you need your build process to work every minute of every day 100% of the time, then
don't rely on 3rd party services.your plan lacks an acceptable degree of resilience. Simple as that.
-
@blakeyrat said in Idiots make their build process reliant on someone else's server, bitch when it goes down:
Waaah! People who pay them money get better support! Waaah
Whatever happened to free and open source? Fucking capitalist pigs
-
@Jaloopa said in Idiots make their build process reliant on someone else's server, bitch when it goes down:
Whatever happened to free and open source? Fucking capitalist pigs
If you want me to support you for nothing, you'll get to wait until it is convenient for me to do it. I gotta get me in the mood
(for lurrrve)! If you want it to be convenient for me sooner, you'll find a way to pay me to rearrange my priorities more in your favour.
-
@Jaloopa SEIZE THE MEANS OF PRODUCTION! DOCKER BELONGS TO THE PEOPLE. MAKE OPEN SOURCE GREAT AGAIN.
-
@anonymous234 DON'T LET THE DOCKSTERS GET AWAY WITH IT
-
@boomzilla said in Idiots make their build process reliant on someone else's server, bitch when it goes down:
@anonymous234 DON'T LET THE DOCKSTERS GET AWAY WITH IT
these guys?
-
@accalia I think only about 1% of them, as I understand it.
-
@boomzilla said in Idiots make their build process reliant on someone else's server, bitch when it goes down:
@accalia I think only about 1% of them, as I understand it.
ah. that would be because unions and their bylaws.....
-
@Polygeekery said in Idiots make their build process reliant on someone else's server, bitch when it goes down:
@Captain said in Idiots make their build process reliant on someone else's server, bitch when it goes down:
What is this left-pad thing?
The craziest part of this is that there's a language out there being used in production which doesn't have even the simplest of string manipulation functionality and has to rely on 3rd party code from random people online. That's really scary; even PHP can do string padding...
-
@ASheridan
More than one.
Have you ever heard of C?
-
@ASheridan said in Idiots make their build process reliant on someone else's server, bitch when it goes down:
The craziest part of this is that there's a language out there being used in production which doesn't have even the simplest of string manipulation functionality and has to rely on 3rd party code from random people online.
I feel you bro, I have to code things in C too
-
@aliceif said in Idiots make their build process reliant on someone else's server, bitch when it goes down:
@ASheridan
More than one.
Have you ever heard of C?Ok, I've been lucky enough not to do things in C, only C++ (which does have a string library). But hell, C is pretty darn old now. Javascript is meant to be this new shining beacon of a language that was meant to pave a way to new ways of developing server software. Of course, I jest a little, but is it too much to expect that basic string functions exist in a toy language whose main way of interacting with cookies in the bad old days was to do it with string manipulation?
-
A quick Google search finds "aptly" which can mirror remote Debian/Ubuntu repositories. Looks open source (has a github link). JFrog's Artifactory, which my company uses for NuGet and Maven/Ivy repos, also supports Debian/Ubuntu repos. Either of these products, and I'm sure others, would guard you against these kinds of problems. Plus it avoids needing to hit the internet every single time you need those packages. Alex's Inedo has ProGet but that looks like it's built around software library packages like NuGet and Maven. I didn't see Debian/Ubuntu/Redhat repo support.
-
@ASheridan said in Idiots make their build process reliant on someone else's server, bitch when it goes down:
The craziest part of this is that there's a language out there being used in production which doesn't have even the simplest of string manipulation functionality and has to rely on 3rd party code from random people online.
Yeah Node.JS is awful that way.
And Python. And Perl. And Ruby.
OH WAIT, all shitty open source crap-languages were coded by lazy slackers who didn't bother to make standard libraries for them. Maybe not to the extent to lacking string padding, but you can hardly claim Node.JS is unique here.
-
@blakeyrat said in Idiots make their build process reliant on someone else's server, bitch when it goes down:
@ASheridan said in Idiots make their build process reliant on someone else's server, bitch when it goes down:
The craziest part of this is that there's a language out there being used in production which doesn't have even the simplest of string manipulation functionality and has to rely on 3rd party code from random people online.
Yeah Node.JS is awful that way.
And Python. And Perl. And Ruby.
OH WAIT, all shitty open source crap-languages were coded by lazy slackers who didn't bother to make standard libraries for them. Maybe not to the extent to lacking string padding, but you can hardly claim Node.JS is unique here.
You're crazy, but I'm bored so I'll bite.
Aren't pretty much all the best and most used dev languages in the world open source?
-
@ASheridan said in Idiots make their build process reliant on someone else's server, bitch when it goes down:
Aren't pretty much all the best and most used dev languages in the world open source?
Best: possibly. But note that C#.net was only made open source after it was already pretty damned good, not while it was being developed.
Most-used: no. VBA's no doubt on the list of most-used dev languages, it's not open source.
-
@blakeyrat said in Idiots make their build process reliant on someone else's server, bitch when it goes down:
@ASheridan said in Idiots make their build process reliant on someone else's server, bitch when it goes down:
Aren't pretty much all the best and most used dev languages in the world open source?
Best: possibly. But note that C#.net was only made open source after it was already pretty damned good, not while it was being developed.
Most-used: no. VBA's no doubt on the list of most-used dev languages, it's not open source.
Aren't you getting C# and the .Net framework confused there? It's the .Net framework which has recently been open sourced, I was under the impression that C# as a language was always open.
-
@blakeyrat said in Idiots make their build process reliant on someone else's server, bitch when it goes down:
Python
[...] didn't bother to make standard libraries for them
[...] but you can hardly claim Node.JS is unique here.Quite the contrary, Python's standard library is huge.
And since Python and JS are otherwise quite similar - no static typing, functions being objects, JS's lack of standard library is jarring by comparison, especially if you use both langs.One place where you see it are basic data structures - lists, dicts, sets. In Python it is trivial to iterate, add and transform them.
In JS, dict can only use string keys andfor ... in
may enumerate methods or properties because object is a dict.Also, string processing is very rich in Python.
-
@ASheridan said in Idiots make their build process reliant on someone else's server, bitch when it goes down:
I was under the impression that C# as a language was always open.
The spec was from day one, for both. The actual code implementation wasn't until recently.
-
@Adynathos said in Idiots make their build process reliant on someone else's server, bitch when it goes down:
Quite the contrary, Python's standard library is huge.
Right; but since there's no central control of it, it's extremely low-quality. It's huge in that "there's 57 implementations of an XML serializer", but that's no fucking good when 53 of those don't work and of the 4 that do, 2 of them don't understand XSD and can't validate and the third one only works on objects created on Tuesdays.
@Adynathos said in Idiots make their build process reliant on someone else's server, bitch when it goes down:
JS's lack of standard library is jarring by comparison, especially if you use both langs.
JS lacks a standard library (other than math and date, and date is implemented mostly-wrong) because it's designed to be embedded. The problem is the people who decided to make JS not embedded, but then failed to fill-in the missing standard libraries. Those people are morons.
-
@blakeyrat you know a lot of opensource shit for someone that hate it so much.
-
@blakeyrat said in Idiots make their build process reliant on someone else's server, bitch when it goes down:
@ASheridan said in Idiots make their build process reliant on someone else's server, bitch when it goes down:
I was under the impression that C# as a language was always open.
The spec was from day one, for both. The actual code implementation wasn't until recently.
So what you're saying there is, C# the actual language, was always open source. Glad you agree with me. So your point about C# being better because it wasn't open source is what, bullshit? For anyone else, I'd hesitate and give them the benefit of the doubt, but this is you, and you'd not extend the same courtesy, so them's the breaks.
-
@ASheridan said in Idiots make their build process reliant on someone else's server, bitch when it goes down:
The spec was from day one, for both.
So what you're saying there is, C# the actual language, was always open source.
By that logic, every (not secret) language is open source, because if the spec was not published, no one could write programs in that language.
If there exists no open-source compiler/interpreter for the lang, it does not count as open-source.
-
@Adynathos said in Idiots make their build process reliant on someone else's server, bitch when it goes down:
@ASheridan said in Idiots make their build process reliant on someone else's server, bitch when it goes down:
The spec was from day one, for both.
So what you're saying there is, C# the actual language, was always open source.
By that logic, every (not secret) language is open source, because if the spec was not published, no one could write programs in that language.
If there exists no open-source compiler/interpreter for the lang, it does not count as open-source.Have you a for-instance?
-
@Captain said in Idiots make their build process reliant on someone else's server, bitch when it goes down:
@WPT What is this left-pad thing?
TLDR version: NPM created a broken system that doesn't track dependencies properly. Some developer removed something from NPM that lots of people were using. A bunch of idiots across the Web then proceeded to blame him for the mess, rather than the people who built NPM.
It's not like this is a difficult thing to get right, either. Store your package dependencies in a relational database, set one single (very obvious) foreign key, and referential integrity automagically takes care of the entire thing for you. It would have been impossible to remove a package out from under the zillions of people who were using it. This has been a well-known, solid principle for decades. But apparently the people who built NPM were too trendy to use well-proven technology like that...
@ASheridan said in Idiots make their build process reliant on someone else's server, bitch when it goes down:
Aren't you getting C# and the .Net framework confused there? It's the .Net framework which has recently been open sourced, I was under the impression that C# as a language was always open.
A language is generally defined by two things: the compiler and the standard library. The .NET Framework is a bit of a unique beast here, as it's the standard library for multiple different languages. It's currently in the process of transitioning to open-source, although it's been "source-available" for many years now in the form of Reference Source.
As for the C# compiler, it was proprietary for a long time before being released as the open-source Roslyn version. IIRC this actually happened before the .NET Framework's transition to open-source even began.
@blakeyrat said in Idiots make their build process reliant on someone else's server, bitch when it goes down:
Right; but since there's no central control of it, it's extremely low-quality. It's huge in that "there's 57 implementations of an XML serializer", but that's no fucking good when 53 of those don't work and of the 4 that do, 2 of them don't understand XSD and can't validate and the third one only works on objects created on Tuesdays.
Sorry, hard to have any sympathy here. If you are trying to use XML for anything non-trivial, that's your own fault and you absolutely deserve all of the pain that it brings upon you.
Some people, when presented with a problem, think “I know, I’ll use XML.”
<Problem:Worsening> <Problem:TimeDescription>Now</Problem:TimeDescription> <Problem:Posessive>they have</Problem:Posessive> <Problem:Quantity>many, many</Problem:Quantity> <Problem:WorseningDescription>more problems</Problem:WorseningDescription> </ProblemWorsening>
@ASheridan said in Idiots make their build process reliant on someone else's server, bitch when it goes down:
So what you're saying there is, C# the actual language, was always open source. Glad you agree with me.
No, he's saying that the specification was open. But the actual source code (you know, the thing that puts the "source" in "open source") was never open until just recently.
Ugh, why do you have to be so obnoxiously wrongheaded that you put me in a position of agreeing with Blakeyrat?!?
-
@fbmac said in Idiots make their build process reliant on someone else's server, bitch when it goes down:
@blakeyrat you know a lot of opensource shit for someone that hate it so much.
He just likes to complain. If you want to be good at something, you have to learn about it, so he learned about what he likes to complain about.
-
@ASheridan but his rant was centered about the library ecosystem around it.
I think no other language compete on Java and .NET on the size and quality of their standard libraries, and neither of them was developed as open source projects.
-
@Polygeekery blakey spent his 10 thousand hours ranting, and he is damn good at it
-
@fbmac He's a fucking savant.
-
@aliceif said in Idiots make their build process reliant on someone else's server, bitch when it goes down:
@ASheridan
More than one.
Have you ever heard of C?printf("%10s", "foo");
-
@ASheridan said in Idiots make their build process reliant on someone else's server, bitch when it goes down:
Have you a for-instance?
MATLAB
-
@ASheridan said in Idiots make their build process reliant on someone else's server, bitch when it goes down:
So what you're saying there is, C# the actual language, was always open source.
That's actually the opposite of what I was saying.
-
@masonwheeler said in Idiots make their build process reliant on someone else's server, bitch when it goes down:
It's not like this is a difficult thing to get right, either. Store your package dependencies in a relational database
That sounds awful.
-
@boomzilla said in Idiots make their build process reliant on someone else's server, bitch when it goes down:
That sounds awful.
Care to elaborate?
-
@masonwheeler said in Idiots make their build process reliant on someone else's server, bitch when it goes down:
Sorry, hard to have any sympathy here. If you are trying to use XML for anything non-trivial, that's your own fault and you absolutely deserve all of the pain that it brings upon you.
Really.
And people wonder why I hate open source developers. They're all like this, people. "If you have to use XML, you deserve broken shitty libraries that waste your time! YOU DESERVE IT!"
What a great attitude. Really moving the industry forward, there.
-
@blakeyrat said in Idiots make their build process reliant on someone else's server, bitch when it goes down:
The repo holding Docker went down for a few hours.
Turns out a bunch of stupid morons have build processes that re-download Docker every goddamned time they build, and it got them all gummed up, and now they're bitching about it on GitHub.
Example comment:
Docker repo maintainers. You need:
Automatic testing on changes
Healthcheck of your repo
basically monitoring and alarmsI hope this never happens again. Docker was causing production test and deployment issues here (on TravisCI) with this although I'm not using a single Docker container in production.
So you're the moron who set up your continuous integration server to rely on a package you don't even use, but let's give Docker advice on how to run their shit. Because obviously you're the expert master genius man.
I never knew Docker was a 2 tier organisation where the user base is split between the haves and have nots. Surly installing docker is global concern for everyone using the software and therefore the support that "commercial" people get should also apply to the community. A paid tier to an organisation is a good way to make money but that should go beyond basics, like being able to install your software.
Waaah! People who pay them money get better support! Waaah!
I love you blakey <3
In summary:
Hipsters who don't know how to code have setup their automatic lego snapper-together machine to ask a lego vendor to send them new legos every time they want to run, and sometimes that vendor doesn't work.
Schadenfreude meter's needle... buried!
-
@masonwheeler said in Idiots make their build process reliant on someone else's server, bitch when it goes down:
@boomzilla said in Idiots make their build process reliant on someone else's server, bitch when it goes down:
That sounds awful.
Care to elaborate?
It's not webscale
-
@blakeyrat said in Idiots make their build process reliant on someone else's server, bitch when it goes down:
@Adynathos said in Idiots make their build process reliant on someone else's server, bitch when it goes down:
Quite the contrary, Python's standard library is huge.
Right; but since there's no central control of it, it's extremely low-quality. It's huge in that "there's 57 implementations of an XML serializer", but that's no fucking good when 53 of those don't work and of the 4 that do, 2 of them don't understand XSD and can't validate and the third one only works on objects created on Tuesdays.
Saying that there is no central control of the stdlib is patently false.
You're right, the Python stdlib's XML support sucks. But there aren't nearly as many ways to do XML as you suggest, and having both SAX and DOM support is not a Bad Thing. In any case, everyone just uses lxml so hopefully some day that will be put into the stdlib.
Having bad stuff in your stdlib is the price you pay for having a large, backwards-compatible stdlib. But that doesn't negate the fact that the Python stdlib is superb. Decimal, os, sys, math, random, sqlite3, re? Python wouldn't be nearly as popular without these sorts of batteries included.
-
@Adynathos said in Idiots make their build process reliant on someone else's server, bitch when it goes down:
Quite the contrary, Python's standard library is huge.
It's. I mean. It's a decent size.
Whatever. It's not the size that matters; it's how you use it!
-
@error said in Idiots make their build process reliant on someone else's server, bitch when it goes down:
It's not the size that matters; it's how you use it!
said by hundreds of thousands of size deficient males the world over.
rofl
-
@blakeyrat said in Idiots make their build process reliant on someone else's server, bitch when it goes down:
Right; but since there's no central control of it, it's extremely low-quality.
Bullshit. Your Anti-Python rants are stupid and getting boring. You might be literally the only person in the world who thinks the Python standard library is shit.