yeah nobody's suggesting you to switch all your company's computers to a small browser project nobody's ever heard of.
maybe the point of publishing the work on a new browser like this is to get the word out, get folks to fool around with it and explore the changes, and hopefully perhaps assemble a small community capable of seeing through a vision of making a faster chromium, rather than getting folks blindly using it as their daily browser straight away?
if the project does take off, by the time it is actually good to be used as a daily driver it will be void of any furry art, trust me.
the beauty of open source is that if the original developer stops developing or goes on holiday for a year you can pick up the torch. mature projects are eventually smooth-sailing and can be used out of the box, but any project goes through many years of not being so pleasant to use (most of the time, the reason's very simple: nobody's getting paid to work on it, so be grateful you have the software in the first place!)
Surely, there exists no other economic system where a percentage of the world's population is allowed access to food, rent and education for their children.
And there certainly doesn't exist any where the entirety of the world population can be given access to these things.
You're talking about hypotheticals, I'm talking about reality.
Saying "these silly people are obsessed with their economic system, which is pointless!" makes no sense if those same people live or die by that system.
As an interviewer you want to avoid being confrontational with your candidates. It's not helpful if they're good candidates, it's not helpful if they're bad-faith candidates like this one (they might be looking for some slip up on your side which makes the interview "illegal" and cause for them to sue your company), it's not helpful if they're simply not fit for the job (but in good-faith) as you don't want to make them feel bad they're not fit for the job.
If you already understood that they are not giving satisfactory answers, or like in this case they're just reading off the chatgpt answers, best to just keep gathering more proof to your decision not to hire them (by asking them more questions which can highlight your reasons) and finish the interview with the good ol' "we'll let you know."
"If you were a Henry VIII-style character but in the film Trainspotting, how would you describe an n-tier architecture capable of serving 50 requests per second?"
Edit: I had to. Here's a small excerpt: Scalability: Allow the architecture to grow in strength and size.
There are worse things than feeling bad about not being fit for the job. One of them is falling into perpetual confusion and self-doubt because you got ZERO feedback as to why you didn't get the job. Deliberately holding back information that would help the other person achieve their goal is deception, despite your good intentions. Be more honest.
I wonder if / think that that way of thinking, applies to many areas in life? At least that's how most people go about dating, is it not (no one says "oh you're just pretending to be such a successful man / good looking woman but you're just making things up)
README says that the git backend is the recommended backend, as the "native" one has no additional features, so I imagine: it handles them the same as git (ie. they are just objects in the .git repo data, and each time you change them you add a new one, and they are poorly compressible and optimizable) -- which is, I imagine, the problem you're referring to.
It won't be completely the same as git, because the client fetches stuff more lazily (according to the linked presentation). So the backend will still fill up with stuff and need lots of storage, but the clients then won't necessarily slow down in the same way.
That said, any git users will still get slowed down - only jj users would see the benefit. Git does have better features these days for shallow clones though and even git is on the way to killing off the need for LFS.
Gogs author didn't want to incorporate proposed changes into Gogs, so a bunch of other developers forked Gogs and went on their own promoting Gitea as true open-source by spirit and blamed Gogs author for his inflexibility. I am using Gogs, becuase it has all I need (Gitea is too little added value for me)...
> Gogs author didn't want to incorporate proposed changes into Gogs, so a bunch of other developers forked Gogs
This sounds like a reasonable way for forking though. I mean what is open source for if you can't go and and implement your own features if you so desire. Sounds to me like both sides are at fault.
I don't know enough of the details to really tell you, but it was more hostile then just that. I heard the maintainer went on hiatus and that's when they forked it - like there was some drama going on, it wasn't just a "I'd like to incorporate my changes here" and more of a "HEY LOOK THE DEV LEFT, WE'RE THE NEW GOGS" kinda thing. Check out some of the other comments in this thread, they explain it better.
The problem was/is that on Gogs there is only one person with write access. When Unkwon goes AWOL or on vacation, it means nobody can fix urgend security fixes into master. In that case a community fork would be necessary everytime the main dev is not available but PRs require merging.
I would gladly switch back once Gogs is no longer vulnerable to the Bus-Problem.
That's just not true (or rather not the only reason). The Gogs maintainer went away for months with no sign of life. He also was the only one with write access to the gogs repository on GitHub which often resulted in no progress for months because of his disappearances.
The project had already forked in the past, but it eventually was deleted and was merged into the upstream because of one very simple reason: Unknwon, the creator of Gogs, came back. The fact that he left again is the main reason why the project forked again.
It's not like other people are mentioning in the thread that "some contributions would not get added" - but rather the fact that he often has really long periods of absence: just take a look at the contributions on his profile https://github.com/Unknwon
And of course, I'm not putting the blame on him - all of us need breaks from time to time - but during these periods where he can't work on the project, the project is essentially brought to a halt, seeing as there is no one else in the community of contributors who is able to merge pull requests - even if they are critical.
Gitea is however the more active (and quite active) side of the fork so I'd say it was quite successfully. You can easily check this in the contribution statistics on Github for both projects.
I evaluated them both again a month ago and found that Gogs is as active or more active than Gitea by actual features developed, they just have less frequent releases.
maybe the point of publishing the work on a new browser like this is to get the word out, get folks to fool around with it and explore the changes, and hopefully perhaps assemble a small community capable of seeing through a vision of making a faster chromium, rather than getting folks blindly using it as their daily browser straight away?
if the project does take off, by the time it is actually good to be used as a daily driver it will be void of any furry art, trust me.
the beauty of open source is that if the original developer stops developing or goes on holiday for a year you can pick up the torch. mature projects are eventually smooth-sailing and can be used out of the box, but any project goes through many years of not being so pleasant to use (most of the time, the reason's very simple: nobody's getting paid to work on it, so be grateful you have the software in the first place!)