[-] some@programming.dev 1 points 4 days ago

built in licensing

how's it built in?

[-] some@programming.dev 2 points 5 days ago

I am not a big fan pf matrix but I think SchlidiChat was the one I used most successfully on android.

From what I have seen a main issue with Matrix is that the protocol can be implemented in bits and pieces. Which is perfectly fair but it leads to an inconsistent user experience. The default web clients you first use to try it out will be using strong encryption settings by default but then a lot of the mobile or native desktop clients don't support encryption. So it's difficult to get going finding cross platform apps that have all the desired functionality consistently between them.

In terms of the apps, I don't think comparing matrix to lemmy is exactly fair for this reason.

[-] some@programming.dev 1 points 5 days ago

that's interesting... I guess a forum and a chat have a lot of similar attributes. The difference is in the presentation with forum being more static appearing. What would be the reason to deploy Matrix like that instead of using a purpose-build forum software? The most obvious would be not requiring a second account.

What's PoC?

[-] some@programming.dev 2 points 5 days ago

Why is it an MIT project in the first place?

[-] some@programming.dev 3 points 5 days ago

It’s not really something developers want to think about very much so they often just use the default.

Do you think it was intentional ideological decision by the Rust developers or some other contributors/interests to make permissive the default? Or a random decision that has ended up being consequential because of the popularity of Rust?

I have noticed for a long time that github promotes MIT license. It lets you use any, of course, but puts a real positive shine on MIT. My perception is that this is a purposeful intervention by MS into FLOSS to promote MIT.

[-] some@programming.dev 2 points 5 days ago

I do not program. So maybe trying to understand all this is over my head. wikipedia describes

A static library or statically linked library contains functions and data that can be included in a consuming computer program at build-time such that the library does not need to be accessible in a separate file at run-time.

I thought that was the idea of binaries in general. In the Arch repos there are many packages appended with -bin. (The Arch repos also contain items of various licenses including proprietary.) Lots of FLOSS packages make a binary available by direct download from their website. Without too much detail, is there something special about Rust? Or maybe I misunderstand the concept of a binary release.

library code licensed under it must be able to be replaced.

Does this mean you need to be able to make a reproducible build? Or need to be able to swap code for something else? Wouldn't that inherently break a program?

[-] some@programming.dev 3 points 5 days ago

Yes you are correct I mis-used the term. I mean copyleft. So I fixed the post. :)

[-] some@programming.dev 7 points 5 days ago

soo you are saying people are tricked into it?

48
submitted 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago) by some@programming.dev to c/opensource@lemmy.ml

I often see Rust mentioned at the same time as MIT-type licenses.

Is it just a cultural thing that people who write Rust dislike ~~Libre~~ copyleft licenses? Or is it baked in to the language somehow?

Edit: It has been pointed out that I meant to say "copyleft", not "libre", so edited the title and body likewise.

[-] some@programming.dev 3 points 6 days ago

Over the years, forums did not really get smaller, so much as the rest of the internet just got bigger.

[-] some@programming.dev 2 points 6 days ago

matrix isn't a forum. it's a chat.

[-] some@programming.dev 2 points 6 days ago

pipeline to fascism

[-] some@programming.dev 10 points 6 days ago

There are so many niche forums.

Here's one I found a while ago when I was looking at repairing an old electric fan I found: Antique Fan Collector's Forum.

In the way that people would always add "reddit" to their searches, try just adding "forum".

31

I'm a FLOSS/linux enthusiast. Over the years I have learned some scripting, and can get around in git. Occasionally I fork someone else's project to suit it to myself. Shell scripts, webapps, browser extensions etc. The kind of thing you can work in the source of without actual programming knowledge by just looking at text files.

Recently I modified a C program to have more legible/useful (to me) terminal output. I gave it a slightly different name and for compatibility have both versions running on my system. For my use-case it is a huge improvement over the original so I want to have it publicly available where I can install it from any system. And to share in case anyone else would enjoy it.

I don't think my changes would be appreciated by the original maintainer. For one thing, no changes have been made to the code in >10 years. The dev is still active so I guess the program is considered complete. For another, my changes are breaking and specifically disrupt the "linux philosophy" aspect of the program. I think having both version co-exist is the best way.

  • I don't want to confuse anyone who is trying to find the repo of the original program.
    • The original is hosted on github whereas I use codeberg; so the "forked from" relationship is not as clear as if I stayed on github
  • I ?do? want to update documentation such as README in the repo to describe my changes and relationship to the original
  • I ?do? want to update and --help/man in the terminal to reflect the fork's name and possibly clarify how it works
  • Should I make some sort of courtesy PR or repo issue offering my changes even though I think it would be (even should be) rejected/ignored? It seems kind of time wasting.
  • In the case where the original upstream was being updated, how do I integrate those with my changes? I've had some luck so far with doing my best to guess about the git process, I think using branch, sync, merge. But I couldn't tell you more than that. Any insight on how this is supposed to go? I have spent lots of time wading through git's documentation but still find the main ideas kind of confusing.
  • Anything else to consider?

Since I'm just dabbling, I try to stay away from more complicated workflows, or those which require specific system set up, when possible. My experience is that when I come back to it in a few months, a year or two years, I will have forgotten a lot; it might be a different system environment. I need to be able to re-learn everything at a later time. Simple solutions that are widely-compatible, and do not rely on my memory are preferred.

I don't mind doing a bit more work than is strictly required to learn about the FLOSS process. I've done it a few times before and it is useful to me to understand things.

view more: next ›

some

joined 3 weeks ago