Hacker News Reader

Comment by m-p-3 | Hacker News Reader

Screenshot I've taken, since there's none on the GitHub page

https://i.imgur.com/F9DtASh.png

This is what I don't quite understand about the github atmosphere. How is it considered perfectly normal to introduce an application "...with enhancements" and not include a screenshot.

I think it's mainly a tooling issue—readme files are repo "homepages" by default, there isn't an easy way to inline an image in Markdown (nor should you want to), and people don't want to pollute a repo with binaries.

This is why I am disappointed GitHub has become the defacto standard. It's not clear what this is or even why this exists. And that seems to be the case with the vast majority of projects on the site.

GitHub Pages addresses this exact need, but it requires a small amount of additional work to set up vs. just tossing up a README file.

I would prefer a site that fosters better care.

So you want a better readme on most projects?

I think the readmd is the problem.

There is something about the github itself, or the culture around it is the issue, since the problem seems so pervasive. I would prefer the site fosters better project information.

Compare github project pages to what you would find at the now defunct codeplex. The difference was night and day.

Even better, a bunch of my older repositories now have broken images since I had to host the images outside of Github for them to show up in the markdown, so I hosted them on Dropbox. Dropbox has since taken down public hosting of images (or changed the method in which you can do it) so they are all broken (and I"m too lazy/repos are too low traffic for me to bother hunting it all down).

I thought you can reference relative pathed images in the same repo.

Not sure I follow you saying it's not easy to inline images. See: https://github.com/adam-p/markdown-here/wiki/Markdown-Cheats...

You still have to host the images somewhere—they're not embedded in the document (which is what I meant by "inline"). Not that I think markdown should be able to embed images (that would be contrary to the whole point of the format), but it doesn't lend itself to easy, one-click (or few-keystroke) images.

Re: "You still have to host the images somewhere—they're not embedded in the document (which is what I meant by "inline")"

I still don't follow you; why is this an issue with markdown? Why do you see this as different than any other markup language (e.g, HTML)? Unless we're talking about something like Word documents, you'll have to host the image somewhere, which could be in your github repo. I still don't see why this is an issue.

It has nothing to do with github, it is trivial and common to have images/screenshots/whatever in the in-repo documentation (or in the wiki).

I also didn't get a good sense of "Why do this?" (Not being snarky.)

GitHub pages are for that. The git repo itself is for code.

Most projects haven't taken advantage of it yet, but GitHub recently introduced the option to add a link to a website or product page.

While it wasn't actually called File Manager, surely it is more correct to call https://imgur.com/a/wDe7L the first Windows file manager?

Apparently it an still be made to run under Win10 if you still have the original executable.

That was written for DOS. It's not "Windows File Manager" just because it will run under Windows. That'd be like claiming apps written for Win32 are Linux apps because they'll run in Wine.

As dfox mentions, I think you are confusing "Windows MSDOS Executive" with DOSSHell: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DOS_Shell

MSDOS Executive on the screenshot was part of early windows versions. In windows 3.0 it was replaced by File Manager (and Program Manager).

The program that you are thinking of is DOS Shell, which is part of MS-DOS 4.0 and higher, runs in text mode (optionally with custom VGA font) and it's UI behavior is somewhere half way between Windows' MSDOS Executive and File Manager.

I concede. I thought I was seeing all ASCII line drawing for the 'windows' in that screenshot, but in fact at least the upper right corner is actual graphics.

I belive it was written for the very first version of Windows, using what would later become known as the Win16 API.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com