10
thread your Philthy feature requests
(awful.systems)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 12 Apr 2024
10 points (100.0% liked)
FreeAssembly
84 readers
8 users here now
this is FreeAssembly, a non-toxic design, programming, and art collective. post your share-alike (CC SA, GPL, BSD, or similar) projects here! collaboration is welcome, and mutual education is too.
in brief, this community is the awful.systems answer to Hacker News. read this article for a solid summary of why having a less toxic collaborative community is important from a technical standpoint in addition to a social one.
some posting guidelines apply in addition to the typical awful.systems stuff:
- all types of passion projects and contributions are welcome, including and especially those that aren't programming or engineering in nature
- this is an explicitly noncommercial, share-alike space
- don't force yourself to do work you don't enjoy, or demand it of others
(logo credit, with modifications by @dgerard@awful.systems)
founded 8 months ago
MODERATORS
so, taking a look at this (because it seems like a good one with which to dive into the repo and gain a broader familiarity/see all the pieces), quite a bunch of places all across the source and docs that mention lemmy and use
lemmyin element/crate/resource names:tackling it would be best in stages, I think. both because in general I'm not a big fan of gigantic branches (being a complete pain to review, and absent really really good testing it's easy for things to slip through), and because that's just this repo even
for a staged rename of things, probably makes sense to try tackle subsystems one at a time? would we want to tag versions for each stage completion?
I want to hold off on this for a bit since it will impact our ability to grab commits from upstream; for now I’d recommend we keep
lemmyas a legacy symbol and usephilthyin new development. once we’re in a good place for this, I imagine it makes sense to do it in stages, in an outside-in pattern — that is, we’d start by renaming things like the executable that’s very visible but breaks relatively little, then gradually make more internal, breaking changesthat's a fair point too. will probably take a little while to find/develop some patterns for do now vs do later
even just looking at the list of places the name got used... oof. some deeeeeeply baked assumptions in here
i mean, lib names and so on is fine really
I was thinking more the models and such