I need a universal UI toggle that says, "I'm old". No balloon-releasing gestures. No floaty guys above my text messages. No achievements, no quests, no levels. No fun. I am too old for fun.
I'm starting to see a wave of single-PR users on GitHub submitting updates to copyright dates. There is nothing obviously malicious about them, though they have a metallic whiff of bot. Is there any reason to avoid these?
@vascorsd Many tools -- like sbt-header -- get cranky if the year is not consistent across the project. But I've started putting the project start year there and leaving it alone.
@ross yeah, I've seen diffs in scala stuff out there and seen than sbt header plugin thing, but fortunately I never used it personally nor professional.
Usually for work it's all internal stuff so there's not really enforcement around that 😅.
Spdx is the best 😌. I'm really liking the short name for the license, and not having to add huge comments with boilerplate text.
I've been trying / experimenting with using reuse tool to manage these things and it's kinda nice too.
I was thinking about the Lean Scala hubbub when a song from an early Chicago album came on shuffle. Chicago's "legacy" albums adroitly blended genres in ways few did before or since, until the band pivoted to AOR and Christmas albums, alienating most of its fans.
Anyway, I'm going to go listen to Chicago II. It still sounds great and it's still here.
Every time a company rug pulls a license, block the principals, on GitHub and elsewhere. If you build your product on the back of the commons, and then delete your product from those commons, you delete yourself from collaborating on the next generation of the commons. Trust matters.
@ross you can't change the license on code licensed under BSD or MIT, because there's nothing that allows you to. You can incorporate that code in proprietary projects, but that BSD/MIT portion of the project stays BSD/MIT. E.g, you can't take an APL2 project and make it GPL3, only the changes can be GPL3.
Also, all the license changes we're seeing are due to copyright assignments being required from contributors, and copyleft licenses wouldn't have helped.
as extra detail, as the copyright holder it's possible to change the license from X to Y in any way one wants. But that's the only situation where one can do that. That's why people shouldn't be signing away their copyright for their submitted changes, since the projects in that way accumulate more than a single copyright holder which makes it harder to change licenses, since they would need agreement from everyone that has copyright to do it.
The Emacs death discourse overlooks Lindy's Law: the remaining life expectancy of a technology is proportional to its age. It confuses popularity with persistence.
A deeper dive than anybody wanted into Semantic Versioning, how its ordering conflicts with standard practice, and how to unify spec and practice. Includes examples for SBT (Coursier and Ivy) and Maven.
Thinking about types of posts on my web site and how to organize and present more clearly. I perceive a dichotomy between moments in time (e.g., blog posts) and living documents (e.g., literate configs) that's more meaningful than the common ones. Streams vs. gardens, or something?
@ross I had the same thought some time ago. I kept the blog, but I have now "notes" that are more or less living documents -- like a personal wiki (but MD files and rendered by hugo + rsync).
@reidrac@ross that’s really cool. So does that mean the recipe for baking bread on your site has a markdown equivalent locally, like in Obsidian or some other app?