Re: Jenux OS, The "Next Jen!"
@339, the code is publicly available. I never said that it wasn't. I said that its not possible to contribute like it would be if Nash had initially started with GitHub or another version-control system or source code distribution system. The source code is privately hosted on FTP. There is no way of actually contributing without contacting Nash directly, which is a terrible strategy for contributions these days. We don't speak out like this because of personal grudges against Nash, I can tell you that. And your comparison to Jenux versus major Linux distributions falls flat because all major distributions -- other than rolling release distributions -- are tested on thousands of devices during beta testing, before they're even released. People are able to opt into beta releases, and code is publicly available. People can, however, choose to remain on stable releases if they so choose. Nash doesn't do any of that. He tests his ISOs on like 5-10 machines and calls it good, and rarely listens to constructive criticism. His code is also incredibly difficult to read, let alone parse -- did you miss that part of my post? Therefore, contribution would be quite difficult to do, given that most of his code is written in such a way that its all a bunch of shell magic with no explanation. And as post 337 said, Nash rarely ever does error checking. Just because something works when you run it and you haven't implemented error checking doesn't mean you should keep error checking out. Error checking is a fundamental concept of software development, and any project that's used by more than a single person should have it -- and even then you should have it because computers are weird, and its very, very rare for a computer to execute a complex program exactly as written perfectly, without any kind of failure or problem. Only the most primitive programs -- hello world, simple addition, etc. -- will run with no errors, and even that's questionable because the hello world program can be crashed because the person who runs it might not run it in a terminal, or may have changed the standard output stream to something totally different. In other words, you mustn't ever depend on what the user tells you, because users are idiots and are unpredictable. The same philosophy applies to a programs execution environment: the execution environment is unknown and unpredictable, and very, very volatile. To not do error checking is foolishness of the highest order and anyone who does that is playing a very, very dangerous game of chance. Instead of doing error checking, Nash just uses a loop to have the operation he wants done repeated until it succeeds. Do I have to spell out to you just how bad that is?
-- Audiogames-reflector mailing list Audiogames-reflector@sabahattin-gucukoglu.com https://sabahattin-gucukoglu.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/audiogames-reflector
