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Jason’s cool photo picker, or jibbly, and was forked from an abandoned project called EHT-sh (acronym meaning unknown) originally made by frederick lumberg, forked and owned by boops_snoops and actively maintained by Xxweeb-lord69xX.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how to build it (which doesn’t work on your distro), but don’t worry because your distro has it prepackaged 1 version out of date and it magically appears on flatpak only after you’ve installed it by other means.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.

  • Fliegenpilzgünni@slrpnk.net
    481·
    2 months ago

    Just a small (or maybe big?) tip for you 🙂

    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how to build it (which doesn’t work on your distro), but don’t worry because your distro has it prepackaged 1 version out of date

    There’s a tool called Distrobox.
    You can install it (via CLI I think?), and then manage it the easiest graphically way via BoxBuddy (available in your Software Center), or just the terminal if you prefer it.

    With it, you can screw all those “Doesn’t work on my distro” moments.

    You’re on Linux Mint? No problems, here’s the AUR for you!

    ✨✨✨ BONUS: Your OS won’t break anymore randomly due to some AUR incompatibility, because everything is containerized! ✨✨✨

    Even if you run Arch, use it to install AUR stuff. Or Debian/ Ubuntu, add PPAs only via Distrobox.

    It’s absolutely no virtual machine. It basically only creates a small, lightweight container with all dependencies, but it runs on your host. Similar to Flatpaks.

    You can also export the software, and then it’s just like you would have installed it natively!
    Your distro choice doesn’t matter anymore. You now can run any software written only for Suse, an abandoned Debian version 10 years ago, Arch, Fedora, Void, whatever. It’s all the same.

    I hope that was helpful :)

    • superweeniehutjrs@lemmy.world
      13·
      2 months ago

      That’s great, but it should still be possible and well documented for people to run things natively. Some people want less bloat for technical reasons (maintaining a product with very little storage or memory). Tinycore Linux is my go-to example of the benefit of keeping things lightweight for a purpose.

      • skilltheamps@feddit.org
        101·
        2 months ago

        When you’re maintaining a product that is based on linux, you’re surely qualified to port that thing to your platform yourself.

        Open source developers are thanklessly giving away their work for free already, and for the many things where there’s just a github page it is just a one man show run in spare time. Don’t demand them to give away even more of their time to cater for whatever distro you’re using, just because you are not willing to invest the time to learn how linux works and also not willing to give a way a few megabytes for the dependencies they’re developing against.

        All the discussions about things like distrobox and flatpak where linux novices express their dissatisfaction due to increased disk space are laughable. In the linux universe sole users have no power in deciding what goes, they do not pay anything and at worst pollute the bug tracker. Developers are what make up the linux universe, and what appeals to them is what is going to happen. Flatpak is a much more pleasant experience to develop for than a gazillion distros, hence this is where it is going, end of story. As a user either be happy with wherever the linux rollercoaster goes, or - if you want to see change- step up and contribute.

        • IsThisAnAI@lemmy.world
          55·
          2 months ago

          Why Linux will never be mainstream ^

          No… It’s the users that are wrong and stupid.

          • Richard@lemmy.worldEnglish
            73·
            2 months ago

            Next time, try to engage rationally and in good faith with the commenter you are responding to :)

            • IsThisAnAI@lemmy.world
              33·
              2 months ago

              I did. Linux zealots can’t handle the truth about regular users and they mostly do not and will not accommodate them. This conversation has been going on 40 years now.

              • TimeSquirrel@kbin.melroy.org
                61·
                2 months ago

                Did you forget the part where everybody is getting it for free and devs aren’t getting paid to do this shit? If you want your hand held, use Windows or MacOS.

                  • TimeSquirrel@kbin.melroy.org
                    51·
                    2 months ago

                    So do something about it instead of expecting the rest of us to. Devs are people just like you. They have lives and real jobs.

                    What is your solution?

                  • ???@lemmy.world
                    1·
                    2 months ago

                    I always felt like most users don’t use Linux not because of any of the things you mentioned, nut because their first computer was a windows or mac.

      • Fliegenpilzgünni@slrpnk.net
        5·
        2 months 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.