• 0 Posts
  • 136 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 11th, 2023

help-circle





  • Plus, the license was only changed on a secondary branch. The default branch still has the MIT license. The text at the top isn’t “this is the license file you have open” it’s “the repo is licensed under this” so it’s correct behavior but bad UX. It would be most user-friendly to show repo license and then also say “this branch has an invalid license, beware shenanigans”








  • key@lemmy.keychat.orgtoProgramming@programming.devDefault To Large Modules
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 month ago

    That makes no sense. If you join b’ and b’’ into b then the external interface of b is the union of the external interfaces of b’ and b’'. The risk of conflicts between those two interfaces is minimal in the situation they described so no need for namespacing.

    I expected the argument to be based on total effort to split then join the internal code compared to the context switching cost of splitting and then splitting again (with an appeal to agile vs waterfall). But this argument feels like they were either dealing with a language/stack with a broken module system that lacks an explicit separation of internal vs exposed or were just joining things strangely.

    Expressing a general rule based solely on a specific situation is a disservice (irony intended).