• lysdexic@programming.dev
    ·
    1 year ago

    The commit history I looked through has multiple commits for something that should realistically be a single “linted the project” commit. It’s valid criticism in this case.

    I don't agree. The trunk features multiple typo fixes and whatnot, but they are days apart and spread over weeks on end.

    If anything, this shows that no one is contributing to the project, and people like the blogger wasted more effort writing posts on how no one is doing anything while they themselves do nothing at all, and to make matters worse they criticise the ones actually contributing something.

    If the blogger really feels strongly about this, he should put their money where their mouth is and lead by example.

    • thesmokingman@programming.dev
      ·
      1 year ago

      I’m sorry, which of those recent commits aren’t things a single linter run would catch? You had me second-guessing myself until I went through, again, a ton of diffs that just fix spacing, remove trailing whitespace, and basic typos things like CSpell can catch.

      For example, the most recent commit as of writing has this: https://github.com/apache/openoffice/commit/0c72d66f1a33589bfa5729d3fc3bdd5e807826ac#diff-1ce22feeb294b6917e38bda4906aed35e50ac4828688ffc5ad370256524731bf

      A commit from months ago has this: https://github.com/apache/openoffice/commit/5b179f6267cea1575fe6248ab8507bf7144666a0#diff-91750778c26e06764cafa81d4adfbf264acfa159addece80f61d4782dcb7f73c

      These are the same fix on different files in different commits. That’s a linting problem that should be handled in a single commit (possibly a massive squashed PR), not something that should be drip-fed for months.

      • lysdexic@programming.dev
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        I’m sorry, which of those recent commits aren’t things a single linter run would catch?

        Ask yourself why the code still had those typos, and why nobody did anything about it except the guy contributing code cleanup commits.

        • thesmokingman@programming.dev
          ·
          1 year ago

          So you want me to invest my time adding basic contributor functionality to a project that’s been around for than a decade? A project that’s been on life support for some time and doesn’t compete with its successor (who does use basic CI tools, I might add)? A project with, if GitHub is to be believed, has one active contributor and has struggled to keep contributors since 2013?

          Both the original author and I are claiming it’s time for Apache to move on. In 2023 this major project still hasn’t implemented basic toolchain fundamentals. I have yet to see you offer anything more than “open source is hard” which I don’t think the original author disagrees with. I certainly don’t. I also don’t think it’s wise to hop on a project of this scale with this complete lack of contribution flow. Unless you’ve got a good reason why all of these good folks here should, you still haven’t addressed the core problem brought up by the original author or answered my concerns about drip feeding things that tooling should be taking care of.

          • lysdexic@programming.dev
            ·
            1 year ago

            So you want me to invest my time (...)

            I don't want you to do anything, but I'm not the one wasting my time complaining over how others contribute to FLOSS projects. If you feel entitled to complain about other people's contributions, in the very least you need to put your money where your mouth is.

            • thesmokingman@programming.dev
              ·
              1 year ago

              I do. I put my time where it is best served and makes a difference. That’s not this project. Not every open source project survives. That’s how it works. You make value judgements like the one the original author made that you still have nothing to say about. Your only point continues to be “you don’t get to complain unless you commit” which has been addressed multiple times by “this is not a good project to commit on.” This is a one-sided conversation.