Recent submissions

Comment · 1 month ago
Comment · 1 month ago
Thank you for noticing. We need to fix that.
Comment · 1 month ago
For the record, that is not what the Zulip announcement wrote. Please don't kick us when we're down.
Comment · 1 month ago
Comment · 5 months ago
Comment · 5 months ago
In a nutshell, I summarise it like this: I see Open Source Software is a public good. As a public good, it doesn't belong in any proprietary platform, nor should orgs of any kind be in a position to gate keep it. We should rather host it on a public, peer-to-peer network that everyone can have access to.
Comment · 5 months ago
yes, we currently have just the base building blocks (`rad follow` - allowlist / `rad block` - blocklist) for the fancier things to be built on. When you "seed" a repository, by default you seed it only with "followed" scope, which means you would only see issues and "Patches" (our term for PR/MR) from the repo maintainers + other peers you follow (i.e. in your allowlist).
Comment · 5 months ago
Comment · 5 months ago
Comment · 5 months ago
Comment · 6 months ago
Comment · 8 months ago
I didn't think I'd ever be part of any group of 7 people in the world, but today is that day, I guess.

And I know one more of those people already!

5 more to go.

Comment · 1 year ago
It should!

And yet, that's technically not CI.

The whole point we started using automation servers as an integration point was to avoid the "it works on my machine" drama. (Have watched at least 5 seasons of it - they were all painful!).

+1 on running the test harness locally though (where feasible) before triggering the CI server.

Comment · 2 years ago
So, if I understand correctly, you’re not so much concerned about the p2p architecture, rather than the default seeding policy? (You’d prefer that to be selective rather than open by default? )

Live from the official Hacker News API

A modern reader for Hacker News · SvelteKit + Skeleton