• 0 Posts
  • 150 Comments
Joined 2 年前
cake
Cake day: 2023年7月14日

help-circle

  • When I started playing the game, one of the rules was that if someone else announced they’d lost the game, I didn’t lose. It was only if I thought about it when someone hadn’t lost (within the past 20 minutes) that I would lose. And since you have to announce you’ve lost when you think about it, just whispering “the game” or something similar, when your intent is clearly to get someone to lose the game, is also functionally an announcement of your loss.

    You might say that I’m not playing right, but I’d argue that my version of the game is more mature and functions like a pink elephant challenge (“Don’t think about pink elephants. What are you thinking about?”), giving the game more nuance and depth. Not much, but still. And besides, I’d say that your version of the game is supposed to have that rule, too, and whoever told you about it just forgot to mention it. Maybe because they want you to lose more frequently. Maybe they just didn’t know.

    You’re welcome to play my version of the game.

    Sorry for your loss, but I haven’t lost the game for years.




  • Only if you have a sign posted, reading “All ye who enter here forfeit thine selves – body, mind, spirit, and soul – to the owner of these lands, until such time as ye leave or are slain,” with the sign carved from stone by hand, with a willowbark dagger, blessed under the light of a blood moon, approximately eight feet tall, flanked by two shrubberies – that look nice and are not too expensive – and visible to all who enter, lit eternal by the captured light of the new moon.





  • By chance did you make her unintentional malapropism a canon part of the history of the company’s name? Like Google’s backstory (it may be an urban legend, but I heard they’d intended to name it “googol” but didn’t know how to spell the word, and misspelled it as “Google” when submitting their application).

    Strange, I suddenly want to have an Italian-inspired, high class restaurant in my game called “Bone Apple Tea”


  • I still wouldn’t call a car an “investment” or anything, but 100% agreed. The whole “cars lose 50% of their value when you drive off the lot” thing might have been true before the Cash for Clunkers program, but it isn’t anymore. Or maybe it’s true if you’re trying to trade-in the vehicle.

    If I wanted to buy the (fairly popular) car I’ve been driving for over 6 years with the same mileage, it’d cost me over 2/3rds what it cost new When I bought it, new cars were less expensive than used cars (i.e., like less than two years old with less than 25k miles) thanks to how much better the interest rates were on the loans. A couple years later, I was getting offers for more than I paid for it. And none of that is a unique experience.


  • I genuinely don’t understand why people here are taking it so hard that I wish the Immich devs were using semver.

    Because you didn’t say that; you said “Breaking changes in a point release? Not cool” and later “I’m basing this off the guidelines at semver.org.”

    I’m paraphrasing your comments from memory, to be clear, so apologies if I misquoted you.

    It certainly felt to me like you were assuming that this project was using semver and was not following it well, not that you wouldn’t want to use a project that receives this many breaking changes / that doesn’t follow semver. Those complaints both make a lot more sense to me - and I’ve seen many people say similar things about Immich in the past. In fact, it’s a big part of why I haven’t migrated from Photoprism to Immich myself - in this regard they’re complete opposites.


  • I don’t think there’s any room to argue that announcing a 1.x with a change the developers say is a breaking change, which is what Immich have done, fits within the semver.org guidelines.

    That wasn’t the argument.

    Following semver is optional. If a project doesn’t explicitly state it is following semver, it shouldn’t be assumed that it is. With regard to Immich in particular, a cursory review of their documentation makes it clear that they are not following semver. Literally, go to https://immich.app/ and read the text at the very top of the page:

    ⚠️ The project is under very active development. Expect bugs and changes.

    Go to the repo and you’ll see the README, which states at the very top:

    • ⚠️ The project is under very activedevelopment.
    • ⚠️ Expect bugs and breaking changes.

    If you can read that, see that they’re on major version 1 with a minor version over 100, and you still think they’re using semver, then that’s on you.

    The devs have stated they won’t be using semver until they consider Immich production ready, and that moving to a 1.x version from 0.x was a mistake made some time ago. If you want to think about it as though it is semver, consider the major version to still be 0. See https://github.com/immich-app/immich/discussions/5086#discussioncomment-7593227 for example.

    As this project is clearly not following semver, the semver guidelines aren’t applicable and haven’t been violated.

    I don’t think there’s any room to argue

    Even if semver were applicable, in this case, I would still disagree. The text from semver.org states:

    8. Major version X (X.y.z | X > 0) MUST be incremented if any backward incompatible changes are introduced to the public API.

    It doesn’t state that any backward incompatible changes, period, require a major version increase, only changes to the public API. I would personally argue that the deployment configuration is part of the public API, but not all project owners agree with me. Even if they do agree, they might say that this was not a documented deployment configuration and thus not part of the public API, and that it therefore doesn’t necessitate an increase to the major version, but as they knew that people were using that configuration, anyway, they included a note about a potentially breaking change as a courtesy to those users.




  • There have been so many places in front end web dev that used the abbreviation “a11y” without defining it (or explaining the 11) that for years I assumed it was just the name of a particular library that had gotten Kleenexed.

    (To be clear, I’m using “Kleenexed” as a verb here to mean “genericized explosively, as if a sneeze.”)

    It didn’t help to look at the code, either. “Okay cool, so all this does is add a bunch of random extra tags to the DOM? Doesn’t seem super useful but okay, I guess there’s probably some tool out there that depends on them but we probably don’t use it.”