• 43 Posts
  • 95 Comments
Joined 2 months ago
cake
Cake day: April 4th, 2025

help-circle

  • Can somebody summarize the issue? I was thinking that wayland and Xorg are different projects? So what is the incentive that people stop using X11? It is also not like Python2 where any effort to support it further would retract ressources from Python developers developing Python3. (And compare that to Perl6 developers renaming it “Raku” and continuing to support Perl 5, or SBCL developers just quietly adding support for Unicode -Python3’s most consequential change - without breaking existing stuff?)

    And one thing more, we saw companies taking influence in Web standards like HTTP 2.0. Yes, it is still open standard and supported by FLOSS software - but one cannot deny that many development in the modern web like advertising, tracking, data collection, and centralization are not in the interest of users, and this us why the interests behind specific standards matter. Technology is not free of interests and technological change is not automatically in the interests of users.


  • (Copying my comment in programming.dev:)

    It is very interesting to see how with Rust and Guix, there is some convergence between programming worlds which so far have been rather separate universes. For example, Rust makes it easy to write modern system libraries which previously would have been written in C, the Linux kernel is slowly adopting Rust, and Guix makes it easy to use such libraries in strong-dynamically typed languages like Guile, Racket, or Python.

    For the general programming community, the promise is that Guix kinda solves the packaging and dependency resolution problem for multi-language projects. And it is making good strides - Guix contains over 50,000 packages now, not counting the nonguix channels which add e.g. non-free firmware. (Just for convenience, here how to install the Guix package manager im Arch).




  • It is very interesting to see how with Rust and Guix, there is some convergence between programming worlds which so far have been rather separate universes. For example, Rust makes it easy to write modern system libraries which previously would have been written in C, the Linux kernel is slowly adopting Rust, and Guix makes it easy to use such libraries in strong-dynamically typed languages like Guile, Racket, or Python.

    For the general programming community, the promise is that Guix kinda solves the packaging and dependency resolution problem for multi-language projects. And it is making good strides - Guix contains over 50,000 packages now, not counting the nonguix channels which add e.g. non-free firmware. (Just for convenience, here how to install the Guix package manager im Arch).




  • Oh, and there is also bup, which might be what you are looking for:

    https://bup.github.io/

    • it stores files in version-controlled copies which can be synced. Perhaps good for backing up photos and such, up to a few GB.

    Two more interesting solutions:

    1. Nix OS and Guix SD let you define a system entirely from single configuration file, so it is easy to re-create when needed.
    2. The Btrfs and ZFS file systems allow to take snapshots in an instant which can very efficiently store earlier versions of files. I used that when working with yocto/bitbake, which compiles an entire embedded system from source - it can handle much larger data volumes than git or bup, and is the right thing when handling versions of binary data.

    And one more, the rsync tool allows to store hard-linked copies of directory trees.

    The key question is however - what do you want?

    • being able to recover earlier versions is essential when working with source code
    • being able to merge such versions in text files is necessary when working on code cooperatively with others - and only source control systems can do this well
    • In 99.9% of the other cases, you just want to be able to re-create a single ground-truth version of all your data after a disaster, and keep that backup copy as current as possible.

    These are not the same requirements, especially the volume of data will differ.

    And also, while you might to want or need to go patch by patch through conflicting source code tree with 10,000 different lines, I guess that absolutely nobody is willing or has time to go through a tree with 10,000 conflicting photographs and match them.

    So the question back is: What is your specific use case and what exactly do you want to achieve?










  • Well, my main reason to use Zim Wiki and Gollum is that all the information stays on my computers -no sync service is needed, I sync via git + ssh to a Raspberry Pi that runs in my home. And this is a critical requirement for me since as a result of many experiences, my trust in commercial companies that collect data to respect data privacy has reached zero.

    The differences between Zim and Gollum are gradual: Zim is tailored as a Desktop Wiki, so each page is already in editing mode which is slightly quicker, while Gollum is more like a classical server-based wiki, which is normally accessed over the browser (but by default, without user authentication). The difference is a bit blurry since both just modify a git repo, and Gollum can be run in localhost, so it is good for capturing changes on a laptop while on the road, and syncing them later. A further difference is that Zim is a but better for the “quick but not (yet) organized” style of work, while Gollum is better for a designed and maintained structure.

    Both can capture media files and support different kinds of markup, while always storing in plain text. Gollum can also handle well things like PDFs which are displayed in the browser, and supports syntax highlighthing in many programming langages, which makes it nice for programming projects - it is perfect for writing outlines and documentation of software, and I often work by writing documentation first.









  • Ah still rolling out the old “stochastic parrot” nonsense I see.

    It is a bunch of stochastic parrots. It just happens frequently that the words they are parroting were orginally written by a bunch of intelligent people which were knowledgeable in their fields.

    Note this doesn’t makes the parrots intelligent - in the same way that a book written by Einstein to explain special relativity has any own intelligence. Einstein was intelligent, his words transport his intelligent ideas, but the book conveying them to other people (as, the printed pages with cardboard cover) is as dumb as a stone. You would not ask a piece of cardboard so solve a math problem, would you?