dahhowl

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.

(wrong link, you mean .com)

The point being?

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."

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.

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.

Care to elaborate?