And yet, I don't know of a better project. Growing, maintained projects will usually get better over time (take major refactors, when being modular, rewritten parts of it etc.). But yeah growing needs to have a healthy and friendly Community Code of Conduct, and that I am more concerned of...
philm
joined 1 year ago
Well yeah the second comment didn't really had to be, but hey it's certainly not really reason enough to ban someone from the repo. The first comment I think is totally ok (as well as marking it off-topic, but optimally with an answer, probably marked as off-topic as well). Just keep an issue (it's not a PR) open, until the issue is resolved in one way or the other i.e. either solved reasonably via a third-party client (with links to it) or directly in the repo, asking the community (when it's not obvious that the issue is resolved), whether this is resolved, wait for reactions, and close it after some time based on that. Banning someone, or quickly closing or not reopening after a carefully written argument, that the issue is not solved etc. is just childish behaviour, especially for a community focused project (I'm watching a few lemmy issues on GH).
despite what Rust cultists will undoubtedly soon come to tell me
And here I am :)
There's a lot of reasons to go with Rust (and least of all performance), especially as web-backend. Top-notch libraries/ecosystem (I work extensively with all kinds of programming languages and most others suck in one way or the other). At this point I dare to say that it has the best ecosystem in this regards. Also a static type-system only being exceeded by Haskell (when talking about general purpose languages, that are actually in use), which makes projects maintainable by a lot of people, especially relevant for an open source project. There's a reason why a lot of high quality projects are either rewriting or starting in Rust or are thinking to switch to... Etc. don't want to throw more Rust evangalism at you, since there's a lot to just google and learn...
Anyway, there were a few changes lately that made federated lemmy better (with the last release especially), the initial bugs I accept. But I agree, they aren't veterans from the valley with multiple years of experience, just a bunch of idealists that had an idea and were persistent enough for years to implement it, I certainly have respect for that. What I don't like, is that they are moderating a little bit too much, not being mostly community focused (among others, to avoid forks). But bringing a federated link aggregator like lemmy to the place where it currently is, at least takes quite a bit of time... So a fork (if really necessary) sounds like the most likely way forward...
That only really works, if the method is self-contained, and written in a language that GPT has seen often (such as python). I stopped using it, because for 1 in 10 successful tries I waste time for the other 9 tries...
This.
If I'm writing something slightly more complex, ChatGPT(4) is mostly failing.
If I'm writing complex code, I don't even get the idea of using ChatGPT, because I'm only getting disappointed, and in the end waste more time trying to "engineer" the prompt, only to get disappointed again.
I currently cannot imagine using ChatGPT for coding, I was excited in the beginning, and it's sometimes useful, but mostly not really for coding...
installer
You mean the "new" installer GUI? I never used it TBH, I always did partitioning (and everything else) via CLI, not sure about that. But NixOS (gnome version) has GParted and all other kinds of partitioning tools on board, so just partition it as you think it's best and then generate a config via nixos-generate-config as described in the manual. One tip, when going down that rabbit hole (when you're committing at least): Start with Nix flakes right away. Checkout all kinds of dotfiles in github of other users (and on github there are a lot of configurations that can be source of inspiration).
OCI images and CI/CD to buid the image
Actually since I just had a similar issue at work. I fought a little bit with the traditional Docker pipeline, and then discovered this: https://mitchellh.com/writing/nix-with-dockerfiles, which not only solved my problem much faster, but is also more efficient, since only the actual dependencies of the package are in there (and it can be really reproducible). So you can actually combine the best pieces of each technologies (Docker - sandboxing/containerizing, Nix - packaging and configuration).
Btw. Nix is rapidly growing (since flakes mostly), so I think a slow shift towards Nix is happening already.
But I agree, migrating traditional dotfiles to Nix+home-manager takes time. I did it incrementally (I used activation scripts to link directly to the old config files, and slowly converted the old config to Nix.
lack of btrfs support was disappointing
NixOS supports Btrfs
AFAIK NixOS supports every filesystem, that other linux distros support, and often with easier/better configuration, e.g. I'm using ZFS, which seems to be easier to setup on NixOS than on most other distros.
Yes, it certainly invites you to tinker and experiment with the system without having to fear a broken state. I got multiple forks for different applications (e.g. helix-editor with a few merged PRs), and configured the system in a detail not comparable to any previous distros I was on. Really like how I can e.g. carelessly switch between different desktop environments (without VM)...
Yes, if you've found your distro, I also don't see a point in switching, there's more important stuff than learning how to install and setup your distro everytime you hop. I only hopped, when I wanted to have a clean install because my previous was kinda broken (dirty state over time), and/or wanted to have more control, or try a different desktop-environment. I have now found a distro (NixOS) where I can have all of that at the same time (so no point in hopping anymore for me too).
I have hopped rather rarely. I think my journey started with Debian -> (all kinds of flavors of) Ubuntu -> Arch -> NixOS.
Maybe I missed a few (started with linux at probably ~2005). I've stayed on each of these for a few years, I think I switched between Ubuntu flavors a little bit more frequently. Stayed on Arch the longest for ~7 years. And I think I have basically settled now since 3 1/2 years on NixOS without plan to hop any further distros (unless there comes a distro comparable to NixOS that has less quirks and is generally nicer to use (e.g. tooling, strong, strict static typing etc.)).
NixOS is quite different than other distros (which IMO are all very similar) but does package-management+system-configuration basically how it should be done (in hindsight). It's a rather steep learning curve in the beginning, but it only gets better over time, since your system continuously improves, compared to different distros that accumulate dirty state over time and in one way or the other break after some time. This was often the reason why I hopped on a different distro, since I wanted a clean fresh install, which I get with something like Impermanence+tmpfs on root after each reboot.
Really? Is it necessary to ban people about making a valid argument. I know and also don't like people asking a low effort "What's the status of this" (and would totally get why such a thing would be marked off-topic, but a ban over something like this is still to harsh IMHO, they will learn, that such questions are not well-received over just the marking it as off-topic).
But the comment discussed here has a valid concern (quickly closing issues that don't have satisfactory solution yet, without getting feedback).
A better reaction would be to just ask, whether the issue at hand is still relevant, having [these] alternatives at hand etc.