Your selfless wish may be granted wwussh @TheBananaKing@lemmy.world

Debian

That’s beyond my experience but I would say functional languages can perform similiarly.

I suppose - and honestly do not know if - aggregation is done via synchronization into some persistance unit.

Therefore I would eypect that a functional language like Elixir, Lisp etc. would outperform a language with manual memory management in terms of maintainability.

Depending on the capabilties of packing structs into close memory or traceability and elaboration of compiler it may outperform single or multi-threaded.

Though outperforming recent JREs may be hard, since they may trace hot paths. Default configuration Java vs. a proficient developer of a functional language I assume that latter at least go even.

But I can’t judge. Even on the repository of said program I did not even bother to look at the contents of the gradle.build or Dockerfile to be honest.

I do think that maintainability of functional languages, when only the common denominator between any functional language is used, is better to spaghetti Java source code. But that’s another issue, right?

// edit: Spaghetti Source Code is a good thing in my opinion. And sincr I did not adsress your question directly: A proficent developer is more likely to write faster Java then functional code, since Java is just a layer above C with one of the best compilers there is. Functional languages require carrying some non-neglectable knowledge of the compiler to make use of the fastest paths through the code. On the other hand Java is just ALGOL-Syntax and therefore imperative; Which translates more easier into *.asm.

// edit2: Synchronization into some db isn’t depending on the nature of the language but there may be overhead where some concepts of languages simply perform better. So I would expect that transitions from some interpreted language is slower then compiled languages. Note that even though Java belongs to the former it is conceptually compatible with the latter. I’m out. You called me out. I’m a still a newbie. Had to append so much.

There is Sublink but it’s written in Java, I don’t think I want to deal with Java’s runtime environment.

Don’t hate Java just for the sake of it. According to the repository they ship a Dockerfile and use gradle to build it. Everything should be abstracted for you.

When comparing environments for a program between Java and Python you should probably prefer Java’s. Years of experience and build from the ground up for enterprise deployment. Python module system is hacked together. It ain’t even be fair for python to compare itself in this regard.

Also this project is spot-on within Java’s main territory. It makes absolutely sense to me to use Java for such a program.

Plus monitoring/maintaining a Java application is way better then any python program.

Would this again segregate the users? Some attribute on a submission which refers to a license would be nice though

I would be happy to provide my energy to microsoft’s openai /s

This would be a good approach to improve growth of the community.

Does the ActivityPub protocol support copyright for user content? E.g. an artist releases some picture and they explicitly prompt a license. Each client should accept that they are obligated to prompt this license when using the content… Something like this

Don’t hate google too much…! They are an essential company to the west world; They contribute a lot to the community.

As long there is no business interest, the developers there are very competent and would defend their architectural choices I want to believe.

But yes, they - as a whole - have earned such a mistrust by now very much IMO.

The EU will already have projects in development as far as my experience goes.

What I do not know though but think applies: Such an act is legally binding for all member states. If they fight these things, they are allowed to propose at the EU court for adjustment in order to be aligned with the national law. This can postpone the national implementation for a few years.

But it can only be revoked by a new act of the EU council.

And they can simply ignore any new suggestion of the EU parliament if they like to.

The Debian community not already maintains a Chromium fork. How much does that cost?

I honestly can’t and wouldn’t judge: Time, Resources, implicit know-how etc. are unknown to me.

The human time needed should grow with the number of patches that need to be applied to the upstream code base, …

jupp

… because some will fail now and then.

Forks are done due to different reasons. Therefore it depends why to fork. It could be possible that one feature diverges so much that applying patches isn’t enough. Especially patches in a debian sense, neither .diff/.patch-patches.

This is what I refer to as “fatness” of the fork. The more patches, the fatter. It should be possible to build, packege and publish a fork with zero patches without human intervention, after the initial automation work.

For a brief period, until something rattles on the build system. Debian patches are often applied to remove binary blobs due to licensing - Imagine upstream chooses to include M$ Recall into the render engine. You would need to apply extraordinary amounts of work. Maybe even maintaining a complete separate implementation. This would also imply changes on the build systems, which needs to get aligned continiously between both upstreams, now.

Maybe I’m missing something obvious. 😅

With each version you have to very carefully review every commit if you want to maintain compatability with upstream, in order to merge patches into your fork.

When there are 50 devs working on upstream and you need to review every commit to assure requirement X, this alone is a hard path. If you need to also apply workarounds compatible with future versions of upstream, you need PROFESSIONALS. Luckily these are found in the FOSS community; But they are underpaid and worse: underappreciated.

// plus I could imagine that things like chrome may even not be coming with the full test suite. The test suite of a browser are surely so huge I can’t even comprehend the effort put into it. And then bug tickets… Upstream says: Not in my version. Now the fork has to address these themselves! :)

It does not depend in how fat the fork is. You provide some reasons on your own.

Your assumption appears to be that open source software can be maintained with minimal costs by the community and sofware-aid assures an ongoing bug prevention of some sort.

In the end you still need at least a few full-time devs on it. It would be fair to pay them accordingly if they are maintaining behemoths of software.

Funfact: Infrastructure costs are x-times higher then IT Personel in my organization. A big chunk of it is energy and space; But its less then licensing costs…

At least the EU restricts this directly to your communication and make examples for its usages.

Mama, look at me. I’m talking to a .com-owner!!

You are awesome for providing an alternative. Would you mind letting me know what’s the average monthly cost running your infrastructure and if you are paying it as individuals ?

Yesterdsy I stumbled over this: www.mojeek.com Apparently has its own index.

I think he’s coming from here:

As an developer you create a solution to a problem from yours. You release it under a FOSS license.

Your job is done - You shared your work. The community may find your project useful and builds upon it. Their interest is to get their changes upstream. You have no obligation to help with onboarding and implementing features for others.

So if they are requesting a merge you may reject it since it does not meet your standards. Maybe you have to make your stance clear and create a CONTRIBUTION alongside your code.

With this mindset you wouldn’t hang out on a non-indexable platform.

Your project mostlikely is requesting explicit participation. Maybe this is the point in between you guys.

Now go on with the discussion :)

Plugins may introduce some risks imo. Non-standard behaviour may be a b*tch.

E.g. the idea of a plugin which posts tags:

How are these elected and shares across instances? And displayed on clients? Are they modifying the actual data written by the user in order to sync?

Maybe they are attractive to admins. But they can mostlikely already query and modify the database, right?

I do not want to be against it just mentioning that it may introduce problems on its own which in turn needs to get adressed. E.g.: When multiple plugins do a task at the same hook; How is the ordering managed? When are transactions committed? Should there be a maximal amount of time spend on plugins at some hook? How are resources shared then?

Let’s think about bad actors: Meta _deploys provides a plugin which compresses and decompresses post content and saves plenty of ressources for the admin. After a couple of years they put it to the grave or change the compression methods such that old posts cant be retrieved. But their instance surely still can access those.

I admire beeing lean. Had some projects where bad plugins raised in popularity and become the defacto standard. But they were resource-hungry and badly written or barely maintained. Workarounds spread back to the original program.

Just looked the first time into the lemmy code and it appears to be very neat and clean. I would recommend to stick to it. But then I am no maintainer and a nobody shrugs

//edit: To me plugins are good to aid customization and enlarging the user base. I do not see how this contributes to the fediverse and instances in the long run.

Why a regex? What do you actually want to filter out? Could it be descriminating?

Do you want to prohibit specific phrases? What abt dfrnt spllngs?

The original comment I replied to did not include considerations about future extensions.

So my - downvoted - comment is even more relevant. There are more important things to put valuable manpower on it. centsdroppedandleave

What U C is What U Get, huh?

I see where you came from.

There are people submitting code with wrong licenses or no attribution. There are people just submitting for the sake of submitting - I dare github profiles for this. There are people who could need some feedback on their code, so that future contributions have better quality.

And it can be very burdensome for a maintainer, assuming he maintains within its free time, to perfectly communicate and elaborate on each contribution.

Also, maybe the project has a feature freeze because in the aimed architecture the same solution would be implemented externally.

Its just not that simple and people generalizing or concluding too fast are mostlikely in the wrong. Bad PR travles faster and further though.

Thin layers allow for bending without cracking the paint.

Open up ticket first, please. Thanks Codemonkey.