this post was submitted on 23 Aug 2024
442 points (94.7% liked)

linuxmemes

20688 readers
1024 users here now

I use Arch btw

Sister communities:

Community rules

  1. Follow the site-wide rules and code of conduct
  2. Be civil
  3. Post Linux-related content
  4. No recent reposts

Please report posts and comments that break these rules!

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
poopsmith@lemmy.world
zephyr@lemmy.world
442
My impression of github since switching to Linux (lemmy.world)
submitted 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) by Alk@lemmy.world to c/linuxmemes@lemmy.world
121 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

I've been transitioning to Linux recently and have been forced to use github a lot when I hadn't much before. Here is my assessment.

Every github project is named something like dbutils, Jason's cool photo picker, or jibbly, and was forked from an abandoned project called EHT-sh (acronym meaning unknown) originally made by frederick lumberg, forked and owned by boops_snoops and actively maintained by Xxweeb-lord69xX.

There are either 3 lines of documentation and no releases page, or a 15 page long readme with weekly releases for the last 15 years and nothing in between. It is either for linux, windows, or both. If it's for windows, they will not specify what platforms it runs on. If it's for Linux, there's a 50% chance there are no releases and 2 lines of commands showing how to build it (which doesn't work on your distro), but don't worry because your distro has it prepackaged 1 version out of date and it magically appears on flatpak only after you've installed it by other means. Everything is written in python2. It is illegal to release anything for Mac OS on github.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Guenther_Amanita@slrpnk.net 5 points 2 weeks ago

Each to their own. Linux is, in my opinion, about choice. If one prefers everything to be ultra minimalist, native and lightweight, then that's fine.

I personally just find to be Linux' most overlooked strength is containerization. It's one of the main reasons why most servers run Linux, because of things like Docker. On the desktop, containers are way underutilized, but that's now slowly changing with things like Flatpak or Distrobox.

A distrobox container is technically more bloated than a native install, sure, that's correct.

But, in my opinion, it's like saying "Drawers and closets are bloat for my apartment. I throw everything on the floor." Yeah, now you have less things in your room, but it looks like shit, you can't find anything and you fall over your tubberware that's mixed with your underwear and shampoo.

Having everything collected in a container only costs me a few hundred MBs and a small amount of RAM if needed. But, literally every PC has more than 50 GB hard drive space and 8 GB RAM. If your system slows down because of one container, then your PC is the problem, not distrobox.

That absolutely doesn't mean we should stop optimizing software of efficiency. But it can help us to spend our time on more important stuff, like fixing bugs or adding new cool features.

I really love Flatpak because of that. Sure, it has some drawbacks, but as soon as more devs support Flatpak officially, and iron out some issues we currently have, like misconfigured permissions, they're (imo) the best package format. Why should a distro maintainer have to apply every software change to their package format? That's needlessly duplicated work.