It’s a bit of a mixed bag for me to be honest. I understand the desire to accurately package dependencies and maintain control over the dependencies without relying on a third party host, but I feel like everyone (whether that’s rust, node, python, ruby, etc) should just maintain a separate registry. As in not package it in the “Debian repos” but a debian mirror of crates.io that the debian maintainers maintain. To whit I can just download the Debian rust toolchain and have it be pointing at the Debian rust package mirror.

I’m sure there’s a lot of extra infra required for something like that, but I genuinely believe it’s more sane to try and get these languages to adopt that, rather than what we have now.

I could be easily swayed another way, but that’s how I feel currently.

Phoronix comment sections never fail to be cesspools

The stress-ng package is like 5MB.

There are a lot of possible ways to validate this, namely just downloading a benchmarking tool and using it. Is there a reason you don’t want to do that?

Arch has had rust code in it for months, the timing is only suspicious if you’re making it up in your head.

From a completely unscientific but ‘experienced’ perspective I think the problem is that life just gets in the way as you get older, and you prioritize your own life rather than trying to learn.

Whether neuroplasticity means you can learn things later or not, the opportunity to learn things later just isn’t there without effort.

Having a job, kids, a mortgage and no social obligation to learn in a structured and organized way probably impacts you more than anything neurological.

I know, it’s pretty awesome right? It’s one of the highlights of the community in my opinion.

Isolation has the connotation of a single thing or individual being… Isolated from the group. Atomization is meant to evoke a sense of the more widespread impact on society. After all, if something only impacts a small subset it’s considered… “Isolated”

That being said, atomization is definitely not a new term to describe this…

History and good explanations of what was changed and why is incredibly useful for being able to determine if something is a bug, a feature, and why something was written a particular way.

I’m not super stringent on commit style, but it absolutely helps to structure commit messages, especially in larger projects where they’re being worked on piecemeal.

2fa isn’t a panacea and won’t solve every problem. It does help though. Why do you think supply chain integrity isn’t something they care about?

Phoronix comments are always such a mixed bag. I get that something still running after 20 years is cool and all, but it’s not necessarily a good thing.

Personally, I usually take issue with the missing institutional knowledge on such projects. It doesn’t matter if it runs, it matters that we’re running something we can fix if it explodes.

I recently built some stuff with the latest gcc compiler that was written in c89, but still compiled. That’s pretty sweet and very convenient for us, but the flags and the commands aren’t documented at all. So we have to spelunk through ancient scripts to find the right incantations or worse, read the code. Because who needs docs for an internal tool ammirite?