Community Rules
You must post before you leave
Be nice. Assume others have good intent (within reason).
Block or ignore posts, comments, and users that irritate you in some way rather than engaging. Report if they are actually breaking community rules.
Use content warnings and/or mark as NSFW when appropriate. Most posts with content warnings likely need to be marked NSFW.
Most 196 posts are memes, shitposts, cute images, or even just recent things that happened, etc. There is no real theme, but try to avoid posts that are very inflammatory, offensive, very low quality, or very "off topic".
Bigotry is not allowed, this includes (but is not limited to): Homophobia, Transphobia, Racism, Sexism, Abelism, Classism, or discrimination based on things like Ethnicity, Nationality, Language, or Religion.
Avoid shilling for corporations, posting advertisements, or promoting exploitation of workers.
Proselytization, support, or defense of authoritarianism is not welcome. This includes but is not limited to: imperialism, nationalism, genocide denial, ethnic or racial supremacy, fascism, Nazism, Marxism-Leninism, Maoism, etc.
Avoid AI generated content.
Avoid misinformation.
Avoid incomprehensible posts.
No threats or personal attacks.
No spam.
Moderator Guidelines
Okay but like, there's a right and wrong way to count time and they're doing it wrong. This is 100% valid to report as a bug, and imo, incredibly helpful - especially compared to most of the bug reports I see! Idk what the context is here, but for the software I QA for work, this kind of mistake would break everything, and I'd report it as a bug. Their comment isn't a reply in a professional situation, but still, that reaction is extremely over the top. What an asshole
Sorry for meeting such an asshole maintainer. I'd never do this, especially for someone who actually did the preparatory work to find the location of the bug.
Seriously that's an incredible bug report.
I've changed some of the details so it's not easily googlable because it's linked to my RL identity. The bug is a purely cosmetic off-by-one error though. And I didn't give any indication I thought it was important or urgent. But the concise description of the bug, reproduction steps, why I strongly suspect it's happening, and where I strongly suspect the fix needs to be made were all included.
The maintainer's comments are pretty much verbatim.
This happens every single time I try to file a good bug report, without exception. I suspect they see the woman's name on my account and assume I have no idea what I'm talking about?
Computer science used to be for women until men realised there was money in it, and now they act like women are too stupid to understand it.
I'm working on a major website migration right now, and was literally hashing things out with timestamps yesterday. If I had to deal with encountering a 24th/no 0th-hour bug, I'd call up the old dev and ask them how they avoid shitting on their loved ones while being such a giant asshole. Make me fucking convert the hours to a number so that I can subtract by one, and then convert it back to a timestamp. I know it's a simple solution, but I would have definitely first wasted hours trying to figure out why and which of my 50,000 posts was causing my migration to fail.
Point being, what you call a cosmetic error could singularly fuel my nightmares for a month. Shame on the maintainer for acting so indignant over what I now consider the kindest bug report of all time. I'm so grateful that users like you exist.
For real!
And then, is 20260124-24:59:30 the morning of the 24th, or the 25th? Who knows?
Yeah, I'd buy that reporter a beer or something.
It's starting to go from bug report to peer review. if she made the fix too, it'd be a fucking pull request
EDIT : Fix'd pronoun
He?
I made an assumption and didn't see/realise their pronoun indicators. 🤷
Let's less assumptions next time and then less mistakes :3
I wish the ones I get were half as good.
Then stop writing such obscure bugs?
You can't tell them what to do! Submit a PR, if you've already figured it out
I always read the project's issue tracker before I decide to contribute anything. Has spared me from a lot of contact with people like this.
The big red flag here that should warn away anyone from interacting with the project is that the maintainer clearly wasn’t using a standard library for time functions. Arrogant stupidity is a given in that situation.
February 31st, 24:59 is going to be wild.
What project is this? I have never seen a reaction like that, if anything I've had the opposite, where I said it was a minor inconvenience and the maintainer said "what do you mean 'minor'? This is terrible!"
yeah, it does kinda feel like satirical exageration of a real scenario
As I said in another comment: some minor details of the bug report have been changed so it's not easily googlable. But the maintainer's comments are pretty much verbatim.
No way. Stuck up shithead programmers are a damn cliche. This doesn't even begin to approach satire.
(said as a software engineer of multiple decades)
This is easily explained by the fact OP is a femme and the maintainer is a misogynist
Yes please link us to the bug tracker if it's public, or the app if not, so we can confirm the bug for them (which they'll obviously hate, but deserve).
If a single bug report about it got this reaction... Imagine.
Yes please link us to the bug tracker if it’s public, or the app if not, so we can confirm the bug for them (which they’ll obviously hate, but deserve).
this is getting close to asking them to doxx their other identities
this is getting close to asking them to doxx their other identities
Too close for my liking, so thanks but no thanks
Close but no cigar.
Maybe I was lucky but I never had an experience like that. I contributed to couple of projects and it was mostly fun. Like find a missing feature -> implement -> PR -> accepted with a thank you. Or report a bug -> get a fix in a matter of days.
My experience was the opposite. I asked the maintainer if I could specify environment variable directly in the sandbox profile config and they said "uh you can do that with the cli [reference to documentation], but sure I will think about adding it" and they had a version by the evening that I could test.
.cpp is the funniest file extension, .see PP lmaooooooo
I don't contribute to projects most of the time strictly due to the hurdles in place for contributions. if I see an issue with something, I would like to be able to properly fix it, not have to follow a multi month process to actually get it in
The last project I wanted to contribute to had the following system:
Luckily I had noticed that the timeframe of existing requests prior to doing it, and decided to pass on it.
Don't get me wrong, a lot of those steps are necessary for proper development cycles but, it's the extra steps that are annoying. I'm looking to quickly contribute and move on. Too many steps or if the process seems like it will be a major pain in the butt = You can find and fix it yourself.
Most projects if they have that I will at least open an issue for it so it's known as a problem... but some projects don't seem to want them reported, let alone fixed.
I 100% understand the frustration. It can easily feel like you're doing the maintainers a favor and they're making this harder than it needs to be.
The thing is, though, from the maintainer side, it very often feels like you're asked to do those contributors favors. You may not care for whatever feature they want to contribute, but then are supposed to put in work reviewing their contributions and possibly having to patch up their work, if it doesn't meet quality standards.
And then, yeah, you start requiring quality gates to ensure you don't have to put in extra work for something you don't care about. But then may also end up putting hurdles in place, so that effectively fewer contributions show up asking for reviews. It's an ugly solution, but frankly, it's better than having contributors put in actual work creating a pull request and then you not having time to review it.
Yeah, I understand that point of view as well, especially for feature expansions. I don't agree with that point of view at all for bug reports /fixes though. It's not like I'm asking for an additional feature on top of the devs' already existing code. I'm fixing a mistake that the dev added to their code that they haven't had time to fix, I don't see the need of multi week or month review processes for those.
But at the end of the day I tell myself that if the dev wanted help with the project they would have made the system easier and I just move on with my life. or if it's too much of a blocker or if it's a small change just fork the code myself if allowed, fix it and then never bother with the hassle of submitting it upstream.
PR rejected: Unnecessary bloat.