with blackjack and hookers
this post was submitted on 30 Oct 2024
81 points (90.9% liked)
Technology
35023 readers
163 users here now
This is the official technology community of Lemmy.ml for all news related to creation and use of technology, and to facilitate civil, meaningful discussion around it.
Ask in DM before posting product reviews or ads. All such posts otherwise are subject to removal.
Rules:
1: All Lemmy rules apply
2: Do not post low effort posts
3: NEVER post naziped*gore stuff
4: Always post article URLs or their archived version URLs as sources, NOT screenshots. Help the blind users.
5: personal rants of Big Tech CEOs like Elon Musk are unwelcome (does not include posts about their companies affecting wide range of people)
6: no advertisement posts unless verified as legitimate and non-exploitative/non-consumerist
7: crypto related posts, unless essential, are disallowed
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
They haven’t been removed from the community though — just the maintainers list. Now they need someone else’s review to commit code to the kernel.
Personally, I think even maintainers should be required to have that — you can be the committer for pre-reviewed code from others, but not just be able to check anything you want in, no matter your reputation (even if you’re Linus). That way a security breach is less likely to cause havoc.
I find that difficult. Aside from code reviews, often times your job as a maintainer is:
- getting a refactor or code cleanup in while everyone's asleep
- shuffling commits around between branches
- fixing the CI toolchain
- rolling back or repairing a broken change
- unfucking the repo
- fixing a security vulnerability
A required review slows all of these tasks to a crawl. I do agree that the kernel is important enough that it might be worth the trade-off.
But at the same, I do not feel like I could do my (non-kernel) maintainer job without direct commit access...
I feel your pain. I have maintainer roles for a few projects where things could be slowed down by a week or more if I didn’t have direct commit access. And I do use that access to make things run faster and smoother, and am able to step in and just get something fixed up and committed while everyone else is asleep. But. For security critical code paths, I’ve come to realize that much like Debian, sometimes slow and secure IS better, even if it doesn’t feel like it in the moment (like when you’re trying to commit and deploy a critical security patch already being exploited in the wild, and NOBODY is around to do the review, or there’s something upstream that needs to be fixed before your job can go out).
It’s like exactly what I said they would do after the original news of the bans from the other day. And I got downvoted for it. Lol
That's because they're not going to actually do it.
you can't know that
The possibilities for naming their distro are endless...
Will we finally get the "Putinix" distribution that mines cryptocurrency for the regime by default? It will have to be a new coin called "RuOil"
Especially, because they can chose existing names as there is no Copyright in Russia (afaik, probably a wrong myth but idk)
No there was copyright, it was only relatively enforced between 2000-2015 ish. And then probably only in tourist heavy areas. In the olden days you could find any soft on "black markets" in open stalls
They already have a dozen, they all suck.
This joke hasn't aged well. I took it as is and just assumed the Dad put together a micro PC with a PS2 emulator on it, and then I stared at the article for 5 minutes looking for the punchline.
The joke still works fine, just replace PS2 with PS5 in your head.
True
Exactly I fully expect Russia to continue cutting edge early 2000s os development
Good for them.
Gl with thst vro
Sounds like a pretty average day in the Linux community