HN user

indigane

26 karma

-

Keybase: [ my public key: https://keybase.io/indigane; my proof: https://keybase.io/indigane/sigs/3hGw9QTqBs15OLdZV4CV7j77I9jzSVx6v4MRWeLhddw ]

Posts7
Comments14
View on HN

[A]pps you install from F-Droid are signed by F-Droid rather than the developer.

Having recently gone through the F-Droid release process, I learned that this is not necessarily the case anymore.

F-Droid implements the reproducible builds concept. They re-build the developer's app, compare the resulting binary sans signature block, and if it matches they distribute the developer-signed binary instead of their re-built binary.

This is opt-in for developers so not all apps do it this way. I'd sure like to know how common this is, I wonder if there are any statistics.

I'm working on a Git GUI for myself, in which one of my top priorities is making it more understandable than Git's own UI.

I usually dislike animations. I used to disable transitions whereever possible, as they made the UIs feel sluggish. And I still do.

But working on the project made me for the first time really appreciate in practice how much amimations help with understanding. I paid a high price in complexity to add transitions whenever the state of the visual graph changes, and suddenly it was really obvious what was happening. Commits and whole branches were sliding into their new position, and I would go "a-ha! I see" instead of "wtf just happened, what am I looking at now?".

EDIT: Fair warning, it's heavily WIP https://gitlab.com/indigane/visual-git

I stand corrected then. I had heard a similar comparison that you should prefer Unlicense over WTFPL, but I had not heard it is impossible to dedicate works to the public domain. What a weird world.

If I want to use Unlicense, can I dual license as MIT and Unlicense?

I know most of these sort of licenses are just for fun, but on a serious note, if you don't care about licenses, and you don't care what people do with your code, I would recommend you use The Unlicense, instead of one that sounds funny.

The Unlicense is almost like MIT License but without any burden on those using your code.

On the other hand it offers you the same (perhaps handwavy) protections from liability as MIT License does.

If you're familiar with Creative Commons, it is similar to a CC0 license, but for code.

Basically it's a legitimate way of saying "I don't care about licenses, stop bothering me, do whatever".

If you use GitHub, then Unlicense is one of the choices you can select when setting up a repository.