I’d legit rather the software develop and occasionally spaff it up and break the server for a few hours every once in a while rather than the non-moving 5 year plans of Lemmy development.
Also, usually piefed.social is the only instance that gets hit with this as, being the flagship server - it takes the brunt of more ‘experimental’ features. Most other servers don’t upgrade to the latest iteration until they’re sure it’s not going to break them.
Good thing we have both development models and people can just pick what they like. I know which one I prefer. 😆 And seems Lemmy is approaching a release with their efforts of the last years as well, they’re at alpha.17 these days…
We are close to releasing a first beta version for 1.0. Admins who are adventurous can already upgrade their instance to that. The final release will take longer though, with bug fixing, performance optimisations and general polishing.
Of course. I’ve had a glimpse at the changelog every now and then and there’s a lot of substantial changes in there and multiple new features. I can understand how that makes it a bit more involved to get a release done.
Not sure if Lemmy admins are adventurous like that. From where I’m at, I can see exactly one instance running 1.0.0 code and that’s voyager.lemmy.ml
break the server for a few hours every once in a while
That’s not what botching the protocol does. It opens the way to mess up the posts that shouldn’t be messed up, until the devs get around to fixing it in the protocol and implement the fix on the server and all the clients change their implementation. By that time data on the posts can be irretrievably borked unless someone sits down and retroactively reassigns which answer is the the ‘selected’ one, which again might need an addition to the protocol because it isn’t a central database, except the dev also can’t actually unilaterally decide which is the ‘selected’ answer because the user might’ve changed the selected answer themselves.
Does this sound like ‘breaking the server for a few hours’?
This smells of fresh college-grad coding with people who can’t foresee how their programming decisions affect the software’s workings in the future.
You’ve spent 5 hours now raging against this “mistake”.
A mistake that you didn’t realize is only rolled out on their testing instance.
You have more than one dev stating they are aware of it and it’s on the list to be addressed later, despite claiming you had no way of knowing that. You do as of a decent number of hours ago.
You have another dev stating that this thing you think is a horrible development failure would require DB access to exploit in the way you hypothesized. Together with this only being in the bleeding edge test instance, this invalidates the overwhelming majority of your complaints.
And then you have the sheer balls to tell another commenter their comment was worthless, as it was too much speculation? Your entire fucking thrust is based off not just speculation, but a critical misunderstanding of the situation.
If you have the development background you claim, go make a fucking pull request. I normally hate that sort of shit, but after you’ve pulled the shit you’ve pulled in these comments, throwing your dick around like some sort of hotshot?
Put your money where your mouth is.
I’ve only got ten years experience, mostly in IT infrastructure admin/engineering, but one of the biggest lessons I learned early was to save my criticism until I actually understood what was going on. Another big one was to just not be a dick bag. And to apologize instead of doubling down when I was shown I was wrong.
I guarantee that if you bring this kind of attitude to work, the only reason you’ve lasted is because you’re on a large team. You’d be out in the first month at any of the (smaller) places I’ve worked.
I have a bit over twenty years with some of them spent at a site that had a million users daily. Seeing as we’re measuring dicks here.
We’re not building a space shuttle, here. Lighten up.
Come on man. It should be a mantra for web devs to never ever lose or bungle users’ data. You know, the thing that gives the web its entire worth, one person sharing with others their personal experience in overcoming the daily grind and tedium: them asking “how do you deal with this shit?” and others replying “well if you contort just so to keep your back from giving out, and press these buttons, you can in fact live to the end of the day”. This should persist on the web for years to come and for everyone to discover. But somehow you think that if you save five minutes on ruminating through your decisions, that’s worth a whole lot and everyone should cheer on you for implementing that change despite the fact that I could overwrite that reply with “you greedy schmuck need to shut up and do your miserable job because you suck”, and this is entirely okay with you.
That’s not what is going on, no. You called my work “fresh college-grad coding” and I described my experience to assure you that it is not. I made no intimations about the length of your dick, qualifications or credibility.
This is a strawman. I reject your premise that losing or bungling user’s data is at risk here.
Yes the ‘answer’ value is on the comment but the full ActivityPub representation of the comment is only under the control of the comment author in the most narrow and technical sense - only for those who have access to the underlying database of their instance (to get the private key for signing the Activity). There is no realistic scenario where this becomes a big problem. And if it does, I can spit out a new release that changes it within a day.
This is a really small part of the picture and to dig down into one boolean value in a project of 50k lines of code and use that to dismiss the whole thing is just asinine.
Oh you mean you reject the changes to which other people, more familiar than me with the piefed codebase, already voiced objections? You call this a strawman because you heard that this is the word that dismisses your opponent’s opinions? Brilliant defense there.
I reject your premise that losing or bungling user’s data is at risk here.
So you write changes into users’ data, but you reject the opinion that this might bungle users’ data because you never cared for the data’s integrity. Gewd jerb there.
And if it does, I can spit out a new release that changes it within a day.
Ah, great. Have you ever considered spitting out a ‘new release’ before this becomes a problem at all, before malicious actors can botch as many posts as they could? No? Well thank you, that’s all I wanted to know.
to dig down into one boolean value in a project of 50k lines of code and use that to dismiss the whole thing is just asinine.
Yes, thank you for confirming that you don’t really care about users’ data and you will gleefully give it up for a half-hour of your time thinking over what you’re doing.
Everyone could just write in a big Google Docs document (or any alternative thereof), this would allow anyone immediately implement any feature they want that’s achievable with text and images. Never mind that I could overwrite all your input with garbage, we aren’t picky about that.
Piefed has been fine for the most part so far. We’re aware of the concerns regarding the Stack-Overflow function, and Rimu is not the only person who updates and fixes features to Piefed.
What do you want me to say here exactly? The issue with the Stack Overflow that you refer to, despite Rimu’s somewhat cheerful comment in that chain has been noted. I suspect it won’t stay that way. Speaking beyond that, Piefed has been fine and progressing quite quickly since it started.
The issue with the Stack Overflow that you refer to, despite Rimu’s somewhat cheerful comment in that chain has been noted. I suspect it won’t stay that way.
This is more informative that what you said above.
Since you appear to be knowledgeable: out of curiosity, has this feature been released to the public? Another commenter wrote that it’s only in testing yet, but idk myself how to take the original posts from Rimu.
No, it hasn’t. It’s only on crust.piefed.social - the test instance. I think it’s possible for some instances to update to that instance (I wouldn’t say that’s recommended), but piefed.social isn’t, and most of them aren’t.
I’d legit rather the software develop and occasionally spaff it up and break the server for a few hours every once in a while rather than the non-moving 5 year plans of Lemmy development.
Also, usually piefed.social is the only instance that gets hit with this as, being the flagship server - it takes the brunt of more ‘experimental’ features. Most other servers don’t upgrade to the latest iteration until they’re sure it’s not going to break them.
Good thing we have both development models and people can just pick what they like. I know which one I prefer. 😆
And seems Lemmy is approaching a release with their efforts of the last years as well, they’re at alpha.17 these days…https://lemmy.ml/comment/22544926
Ah thanks. I wrongfully assumed alpha meant alpha testing version. But seems there’s still a lot to do before that.
We are close to releasing a first beta version for 1.0. Admins who are adventurous can already upgrade their instance to that. The final release will take longer though, with bug fixing, performance optimisations and general polishing.
Of course. I’ve had a glimpse at the changelog every now and then and there’s a lot of substantial changes in there and multiple new features. I can understand how that makes it a bit more involved to get a release done.
Not sure if Lemmy admins are adventurous like that. From where I’m at, I can see exactly one instance running 1.0.0 code and that’s voyager.lemmy.ml
That’s not what botching the protocol does. It opens the way to mess up the posts that shouldn’t be messed up, until the devs get around to fixing it in the protocol and implement the fix on the server and all the clients change their implementation. By that time data on the posts can be irretrievably borked unless someone sits down and retroactively reassigns which answer is the the ‘selected’ one, which again might need an addition to the protocol because it isn’t a central database, except the dev also can’t actually unilaterally decide which is the ‘selected’ answer because the user might’ve changed the selected answer themselves.
Does this sound like ‘breaking the server for a few hours’?
This smells of fresh college-grad coding with people who can’t foresee how their programming decisions affect the software’s workings in the future.
You’ve spent 5 hours now raging against this “mistake”.
A mistake that you didn’t realize is only rolled out on their testing instance.
You have more than one dev stating they are aware of it and it’s on the list to be addressed later, despite claiming you had no way of knowing that. You do as of a decent number of hours ago.
You have another dev stating that this thing you think is a horrible development failure would require DB access to exploit in the way you hypothesized. Together with this only being in the bleeding edge test instance, this invalidates the overwhelming majority of your complaints.
And then you have the sheer balls to tell another commenter their comment was worthless, as it was too much speculation? Your entire fucking thrust is based off not just speculation, but a critical misunderstanding of the situation.
If you have the development background you claim, go make a fucking pull request. I normally hate that sort of shit, but after you’ve pulled the shit you’ve pulled in these comments, throwing your dick around like some sort of hotshot?
Put your money where your mouth is.
I’ve only got ten years experience, mostly in IT infrastructure admin/engineering, but one of the biggest lessons I learned early was to save my criticism until I actually understood what was going on. Another big one was to just not be a dick bag. And to apologize instead of doubling down when I was shown I was wrong.
I guarantee that if you bring this kind of attitude to work, the only reason you’ve lasted is because you’re on a large team. You’d be out in the first month at any of the (smaller) places I’ve worked.
Haha
I have 25 years of experience at this and am well aware of the tradeoffs I’m making.
We’re not building a space shuttle, here. Lighten up.
Most of the people agree with your approach. Not sure why that person is so aggressive.
I have a bit over twenty years with some of them spent at a site that had a million users daily. Seeing as we’re measuring dicks here.
Come on man. It should be a mantra for web devs to never ever lose or bungle users’ data. You know, the thing that gives the web its entire worth, one person sharing with others their personal experience in overcoming the daily grind and tedium: them asking “how do you deal with this shit?” and others replying “well if you contort just so to keep your back from giving out, and press these buttons, you can in fact live to the end of the day”. This should persist on the web for years to come and for everyone to discover. But somehow you think that if you save five minutes on ruminating through your decisions, that’s worth a whole lot and everyone should cheer on you for implementing that change despite the fact that I could overwrite that reply with “you greedy schmuck need to shut up and do your miserable job because you suck”, and this is entirely okay with you.
That’s not what is going on, no. You called my work “fresh college-grad coding” and I described my experience to assure you that it is not. I made no intimations about the length of your dick, qualifications or credibility.
Good day, sir.
Oh, so your response to the quality of your work is to cite your age. Wow, what an amazing retort.
This is a strawman. I reject your premise that losing or bungling user’s data is at risk here.
Yes the ‘answer’ value is on the comment but the full ActivityPub representation of the comment is only under the control of the comment author in the most narrow and technical sense - only for those who have access to the underlying database of their instance (to get the private key for signing the Activity). There is no realistic scenario where this becomes a big problem. And if it does, I can spit out a new release that changes it within a day.
This is a really small part of the picture and to dig down into one boolean value in a project of 50k lines of code and use that to dismiss the whole thing is just asinine.
Oh you mean you reject the changes to which other people, more familiar than me with the piefed codebase, already voiced objections? You call this a strawman because you heard that this is the word that dismisses your opponent’s opinions? Brilliant defense there.
So you write changes into users’ data, but you reject the opinion that this might bungle users’ data because you never cared for the data’s integrity. Gewd jerb there.
Ah, great. Have you ever considered spitting out a ‘new release’ before this becomes a problem at all, before malicious actors can botch as many posts as they could? No? Well thank you, that’s all I wanted to know.
Yes, thank you for confirming that you don’t really care about users’ data and you will gleefully give it up for a half-hour of your time thinking over what you’re doing.
I’m speaking generally. I’d rather Piefed development speed and the side-effects that come with that than Lemmy’s stagnation.
Everyone could just write in a big Google Docs document (or any alternative thereof), this would allow anyone immediately implement any feature they want that’s achievable with text and images. Never mind that I could overwrite all your input with garbage, we aren’t picky about that.
Piefed has been fine for the most part so far. We’re aware of the concerns regarding the Stack-Overflow function, and Rimu is not the only person who updates and fixes features to Piefed.
Have you considered a career in politics? What with the way you phrase your replies.
What do you want me to say here exactly? The issue with the Stack Overflow that you refer to, despite Rimu’s somewhat cheerful comment in that chain has been noted. I suspect it won’t stay that way. Speaking beyond that, Piefed has been fine and progressing quite quickly since it started.
Where as Lemmy seems utterly frozen.
This is more informative that what you said above.
Since you appear to be knowledgeable: out of curiosity, has this feature been released to the public? Another commenter wrote that it’s only in testing yet, but idk myself how to take the original posts from Rimu.
No, it hasn’t. It’s only on crust.piefed.social - the test instance. I think it’s possible for some instances to update to that instance (I wouldn’t say that’s recommended), but piefed.social isn’t, and most of them aren’t.