Ironically, the www.gnu.org link is giving me ERR_CONNECTION_CLOSED, and the TLS cert for gnu.org is invalid. So maybe the better question is "What's wrong with gnu.org".
Are you seriously asking me for a technical argument against a rambling screed by GNU cultists? There’s no technical argument in it, just GNU circle-jerking about an invented problem. If there’s a specific claim, quote it; otherwise, “tech argument is needed” is just your personal preference.
Did you even read it? Like always, I am grateful that Richard's still contributing towards software-freedom. He's a giant and a legend.
Git was designed to support the Internet-spanning development project that maintains the kernel Linux. Therefore, Git needs a concept of user identity that also spans the Internet, and the Git developers found a simple solution: email addresses, including an optional name.
This was an obvious choice for another reason: development of the kernel Linux is primarily coordinated using mailing lists. That project has its own mailing list infrastructure, and Git was also originally designed to facilitate processing patches exchanged by email.
GitHub evidently disagrees with these design decisions, because it not only fails to provide mailing lists, but also absolutely refuses to display email addresses in its main web UI. If a commit has an email address associated with a GitHub account, a link to that account is shown, otherwise only a name is shown with no link at all.
One of the moral principles of the free software movement is that the barriers to users becoming developers themselves should be minimal and only technical (and those are acceptable only because barriers such as requiring knowledge of programming fundamentally cannot be eliminated). Obscuring email addresses as GitHub does has the effect of isolating users from existing developers. The requirement to create an account at GitHub to participate in discussions is also a subtle social barrier to users who do not yet think of themselves as developers.
I've been unable to contact the developers of a project before as their only communication channel is Github. This is a technical decision by Microsoft to create a monopoly.
Yes, I read it. It’s bullshit from start to finish: the “problems” are made up. GitHub is not a monopoly, and nobody forces you to use it. If you don’t like it, self-host or use another forge. Everyone is free to choose what’s convenient and best for their own projects. Prescribing what others should do is the height of idiocy.
If you’re one of those ancient people who, for whatever reason, still want to deal with email and mailing lists, you can still do it. Git lets you produce patches and send them by email. But expecting everyone else to cater to that preference is absurd.
The real question isn’t "What’s wrong with GitHub?" It’s "What’s wrong with Stallman?"
Whoa, don’t conflate the two. The Stallman cult is just one radical faction within FOSS culture. The issues described are subjective, real only to him and his followers. The problem is that Stallman tries to present them as everyone’s problems. But even his unhinged followers can keep avoiding the “issues” simply by using git and gh instead of the GitHub web UI. The whole thing is as absurd as a vegetarian ranting in a restaurant that has an entire section of salads on the menu.
I didn't recognize those names, so I looked them up:
Jacob Bachmeyer: Jacob Bachmeier (born January 29, 1998) is an American politician who served in the Montana House of Representatives from 2017 through 2021. A member of the Democratic Party, Bachmeier was elected to office at the age of 18, making him the youngest person ever to be elected to the Montana House of Representatives.[1]
Richard Stallman: Richard Matthew Stallman (/ˈstɔːlmən/ STAWL-mən; born March 16, 1953), also known by his initials rms,[1] is an American free software movement activist and programmer. He campaigns for software to be distributed in such a manner that its users have the freedom to use, study, distribute, and modify that software. Software which ensures these freedoms is termed free software. Stallman launched the GNU Project, founded the Free Software Foundation (FSF) in October 1985,[2] developed the GNU C Compiler and GNU Emacs, and wrote all versions of the GNU General Public License.
Idk about Jacob Bachmeyer, but for me, Richard Stallman's opinion would carry weight.
10 Comments
nanometer1625@thelemmy.club · 0 pts · 6d
Ironically, the www.gnu.org link is giving me
ERR_CONNECTION_CLOSED, and the TLS cert for gnu.org is invalid. So maybe the better question is "What's wrong with gnu.org".hobata@lemmy.ml · -4 pts · 7d
Mercifully, it says right at the top:
That already puts you in the mood to treat everything that follows as the amusing bullshit it is.
librebyte@lemmy.ml · 4 pts · 6d
Tech argument is needed not your personal preference.
hobata@lemmy.ml · -1 pts · 6d
Are you seriously asking me for a technical argument against a rambling screed by GNU cultists? There’s no technical argument in it, just GNU circle-jerking about an invented problem. If there’s a specific claim, quote it; otherwise, “tech argument is needed” is just your personal preference.
dropdrip@lemmy.ml · 2 pts · 6d
Did you even read it? Like always, I am grateful that Richard's still contributing towards software-freedom. He's a giant and a legend.
I've been unable to contact the developers of a project before as their only communication channel is Github. This is a technical decision by Microsoft to create a monopoly.
hobata@lemmy.ml · 0 pts · 6d
Yes, I read it. It’s bullshit from start to finish: the “problems” are made up. GitHub is not a monopoly, and nobody forces you to use it. If you don’t like it, self-host or use another forge. Everyone is free to choose what’s convenient and best for their own projects. Prescribing what others should do is the height of idiocy.
If you’re one of those ancient people who, for whatever reason, still want to deal with email and mailing lists, you can still do it. Git lets you produce patches and send them by email. But expecting everyone else to cater to that preference is absurd.
The real question isn’t "What’s wrong with GitHub?" It’s "What’s wrong with Stallman?"
EnsignWashout@startrek.website · 1 pts · 3d
Email is a democratized decentralized highly resilient communication platform.
GitHub requires a central identity service, now controlled by a monopolistic mega corporation.
This is everyone's problem. Some people just don't understand why that's a problem, yet.
librebyte@lemmy.ml · 1 pts · 3d
if you don't identify with free software culture is your personal preference, all issue described are real.
hobata@lemmy.ml · 2 pts · 3d
Whoa, don’t conflate the two. The Stallman cult is just one radical faction within FOSS culture. The issues described are subjective, real only to him and his followers. The problem is that Stallman tries to present them as everyone’s problems. But even his unhinged followers can keep avoiding the “issues” simply by using git and gh instead of the GitHub web UI. The whole thing is as absurd as a vegetarian ranting in a restaurant that has an entire section of salads on the menu.
nanometer1625@thelemmy.club · 3 pts · 6d
I didn't recognize those names, so I looked them up:
Idk about Jacob Bachmeyer, but for me, Richard Stallman's opinion would carry weight.