I paid for it too!
It's the first piece of shareware I actually went out of my way to pay for because it was so good that I’d be genuinely pissed off if it died. I'd probably end up switching to pijul or something else for my projects if it ever did.
I've seen a bunch of people messing the windows version running in linux in the fork forums, so it may be coming in an unsupported capacity.
Yeah, I use it when ssh'd into a server, but it's just so awkward to use.
Sometimes it just really doesn't want to separate a hunk. Other times you want to stage all lines except one, and you have to do a million splits just to target the lines you want to keep.
It'd be far easier if you could just select the lines you want to affect. It's literally the first feature shown in lazygit's readme. I think half the reason that people use lazygit is that partial commits are so awkward to perform in most other clients.
Luckily Fork does it as well as lazygit
Fork !!!
It's hands down the best git client.
It's free as in: sublime text or winzip where they ask you once a month if you want to pay for it but you can just select: I'm still trying it out, and it gets out of your way.
And one killer feature that I haven't seen any other git clients handle: allowing me to stage only one side of the diff. As in: if I change a line (so it shows up as one removed line and one new line in git), I can decide to add the new line change while still keeping the old line.
So changing this:
doThing(1);
into this:
doThing(2);
Shows up in git as:
- doThing(1);
+ doThing(2);
But if I still want to keep doThing(1);, I don't have to go back into my code to retype doThing(1);, or do any manual copy-pasting. I can just highlight and add only doThing(2); to the staging area and discard the change to doThing(1);.
So now the code exists as:
doThing(1);
doThing(2);
Now with a one-liner example like this, we could always re-enter the code again. But for larger code changes? It's far easier to just highlight the code in the diff and say: yes to this and no to the other stuff.
And when you get used to it, it makes it really easy to split what would be large git commits into smaller related changes keeping your git history clean and easy to understand.
The first problem is they're letting AI touch their code.
The second problem is they're relying on a human to pick up changes in moved code while using git's built-in diff tools. There's a whole bunch of studies that show how git's diff algorithms are terrible, and how swapping to newer diff algos improves things considerably.
TL;DR on the studies:
There's also a bunch of alternative diff algos you can use, but the best ones are paid, and the free ones have fewer features. See:
Looks like you can't distribute a modified version of the project (e.g. a fork), but it wouldn't stop anyone contributing to or distributing a separate project that users could run locally to patch duckstation's build process where they can now build it on and for their own machines.
A build patch wouldn't contain any copyrighted material, so anyone could contribute and distribute it.
Ironic considering that's how many emulator get around legal issues. Emulators distribute virtual machines, but they don't distribute the copyrighted material.
the dev deliberately changed the license to his source code to prevent forks
The licence is a creative commons licence and hasn't been changed in 11 months.
I'm not sure what you're talking about
I have to disagree here thanks to one great and recent counterexample:
Remember OBS getting hammered by error reports that had already been fixed ages ago?
Fedora had a habit of building and distributing their own version of third party projects.
Fedora users were downloading OBS but they were getting the broken Fedora repackaged version instead.
No matter how many times OBS tried to get Fedora to change what they were doing, the Fedora devs wouldn't budge.
It led to OBS threatening legal action against Fedora:
See: https://gitlab.com/fedora/sigs/flatpak/fedora-flatpaks/-/issues/39#note_2344970813 Video version: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dJJvq3dpylM
Fedora finally started listening to application devs after that.
Podcast interview discussing resolution: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oKP1hgdFJKo
Now for Duckstation it's a similar thing.
Arch (AUR) has a borked distribution that they're linked to instead of the official version.
The one difference is that OBS has financial support from paid streaming software that uses OBS as a base, whereas Duckstation doesn't.
Which means that Duckstation doesn't have the financial backing to legally compel Arch to drop their borked distribution.
So their only recourse is to make a public appeal saying if this isn't fixed, I'm dropping support entirely.
Entirely understandable.
Or, maybe they don't have enough contributors to manage all the issues coming in
Most new users won't even know that there is a choice until they're presented with it, and most will just stick with the default option anyway. (which most distros have/are switching to wayland)
The top comment in the linked article pointed out how that chunk of text was less than truthful:
There’s definitely regressions that need to be fixed, but the way it is presented here is just misinformation, mixing things like project-specific bugs and misunderstandings in as Wayland problems.
*BSD is officially supported by Wayland and by several display servers (a better state than for X11 where the *BSD’s had to patch things quite extensively downstream), the graphics tablet thing is a KDE-specific bug, and global hotkeys is available in some display servers through XDG portals (albeit a bit slowly), and using multiple independent mouse cursors is very specifically a Wayland feature (wayland multi-seat). Restoring window state is also supported, it just works differently than X11, and sway at least supports global fullscreen the same way as i3. [...]
The other comments pick out the other issues the top comment didn't go through.
90% of the content depends upon an unspoken lie-by-ommision to present its case, or is just a flat out lie.
This whole post should probably just be reported and removed