469 karma · joined February 23, 2013
But this is a totally unfair characterization of the license, so they wouldn't call it this.
The example (https://trackingco.de/public/9ykvs7rk) does not work for me. Also, the first time I visited the site I saw Lightning Bitcoin and then left. You lost me as soon as I read that because I'm not interested in that. I was just trying to find a simple (but useful) analytics service that's easy to use.
You mentioned TTI (time to interactive) as a concern but that is a metric the Gatsby team seems to really be aware of from the beginning and I think they've done a pretty good job of dealing with it so far, see: https://www.gatsbyjs.org/blog/2017-09-13-why-is-gatsby-so-fa... In general though I've found client-side hydration to work pretty seamlessly in both React and Vue. I'll be shipping my first (non-trivial) Vue Server-Side Rendered app to production soon.
I think Gatsby would do a pretty good job even for content-heavy sites. It's built to try to only render the critical-path items. If you have a content-heavy site, you most likely have implemented some sort of summary list and pagination and only the first set of links on each static page are going to be prefetched by the browser. So it's not like you have to load all the data up front (and you probably shouldn't for UX reasons), you just have to organize the data appropriately like you would for any other kind of site. I've found that Gatsby's graphql interface makes doing these things a breeze compared to my previous React experience where I've had to mess around with state management libraries like Redux.
I'm confused by what you meant by "you can't take advantage of your framework to generate image tags". Is this in the context of Nuxt processing markdown on the client? Like I mentioned previously, this shouldn't be an issue with Gatsby and there are some cool plugins that, for example, allow you to process images in markdown during the build so that they are lazy loaded and initially show a low-res geometric representation of the image.
I can understand your hesitation to want to work with React though. I was hesitant at first. I would get annoyed at writing JSX, but once I got used to it, I found it tolerable and on rare cases I actually prefer it now.
I’ve been lucky support-wise, but maybe you would get better service from your local Apple Business team if thats an option?
It would take me a while to get used to having to press a button to show the trackpad like on the Yoga Book. I like that it automatically hides when typing, but constantly having to bring it back up, to scroll in a small textarea for example, would be annoying.
Merging the touchbar and trackpad, kind of like that Asus laptop that came out recently would be interesting. I thought it would be awkward at first but a lot of reviewers seem to think it's useful.
You seem to be arguing that the analogy is bad because there is no check on his behavior, I don't know why this is a necessary condition, but it's not true anyway, there's the same check as in the analogy: reputation. If I deny access to someone to my pool for no reason or a bad reason, my reputation will suffer in the community. It's the same thing in open source. That is why it is often described by people as a community.
I don't think I did understand it poorly. Using a word like "gross" denotes a certain emotion. They also said, "I would rather use non-free software than risk being sued just for being a user." This makes it sound like getting "sued for just being a user", in other words, unreasonably, is likely. All I'm saying is that I don't think that risk is as high as OP is making it seem, especially if you're not a bad neighbor, which I think is a reasonable thing for Zed to expect.
This isn't a straw man. Read the parent:
"No, but the clause in that license is gross. He can sue any of his users at any time if he decides he doesn't want them to be his users anymore."
OP is entitled to his opinion, but he's not giving Zed the benefit of the doubt. He is framing it in a way that makes it seem Zed will exercise this right unreasonably. At least, that's the way I understood what he said.
It seems to me that Zed felt that he had been taken advantage of from users of his open source software in the past and this is simply a provision to guard against that. Whether you agree with his reasoning or not, it's not fair to just dismiss it and assume malicious intent.
Imagine you tell your neighbors they can use your pool so long as they act responsibly otherwise their access would be revoked. You're not going to spell out every little thing that they can/cannot do. You'd just hope that they'd use common sense and revoke their access if they do something you find intolerable. Imagine your neighbor responding to this offer, "Uhh yea, that's not going to work for me. I want unrevokable access." Ridiculous right?
When digging a tunnel, there is a finite number of kinds of rock that you can hit. It's well within the realm of possibility that an experienced engineer is familiar with any of the rock they will encounter, even if they didn't expect to hit them when digging. This is generally not the case with software. Even as an experienced engineer you continually hit issues that you've never encountered before and don't know how to solve without spending a significant amount of time doing research or trying out different solutions.
The upper bounds of complexity are higher in software than construction. It's not narcissism, it's just the nature of that kind of work.