Recent activity

Re: Improving Sourcehut design, accessibility and frontend code 28 days ago

From Norman Gray to ~sircmpwn/sr.ht-discuss

Greetings.

On 23 Dec 2021, at 18:17, Evan Boehs wrote:

> Many people here are blunt, it's something that comes with what 
> sourcehut is: blunt to the point software, but equally I think it's 
> important to remind newcomers that despite the attitude, their work is 
> welcome and appreciated, people just cut to the chase.

On this point, I think it's also important to remark that this is not 
just about 'newcomers'.  I've been doing this broad type of stuff for 
30+ years, and I for one strongly prefer communities where folk make the 
obvious effort to express themselves in a civil way.  'Bluntness' is

Re: Improving Sourcehut design, accessibility and frontend code a month ago

From Norman Gray to ~sircmpwn/sr.ht-discuss

On 17 Dec 2021, at 14:26, Thomasorus wrote:

>> I am doubtful drew will approve of this, but it's impossible to judge
>> without mockups. What changes to the style are you suggesting?
>
> On the top of my mind:
>
> - Try to create a visual identity to Sourcehut. Outside of the logo
> there is almost nothing that characterize the project.
> - A more intentional and readable color palette that would allow
> making themes.
> - More coherent spacings to group and separate things so it's
> more easy to scan information. Should be themable too, to have

Re: "The Hidden Costs of Requiring Accounts" a month ago

From Norman Gray to ~sircmpwn/sr.ht-discuss

On 22 Nov 2021, at 7:27, Drew DeVault wrote:

> On Sun Nov 21, 2021 at 12:03 AM CET, Benj. Mako Hill wrote:
>
>> The paper is open access (somewhere between green and gold OA) and has
>>
>> been publicly available for quite some time. I completely agree that
>>
>> open science should be the standard and I've made the paper, the code,
>>
>> and data fully available.
>
>  Wonderful! It was not clear from the initial blog post.

Re: "The Hidden Costs of Requiring Accounts" 2 months ago

From Norman Gray to ~sircmpwn/sr.ht-discuss

On 20 Nov 2021, at 7:54, Tim Allen wrote:

> I don't think Sean is one of the authors, but the blog-post they link 
> to
> includes a link to a non-paywalled PDF hosted on the primary author's
> personal website:

Just by the way, the (May 2020) paper does appear to be currently open 
access on the publisher website: 
https://doi.org/10.1177%2F0093650220910345 (thus either Gold OA, or the 
variant which makes it OA after an embargo period).

--

Re: Feature request: Attachments in todo 3 months ago

From Norman Gray to ~sircmpwn/sr.ht-discuss

Drew, hello.

On 20 Oct 2021, at 12:45, Drew DeVault wrote:

> On Wed Oct 20, 2021 at 11:33 AM CEST, Norman Gray wrote:
>
>> This may be another feature request, but there doesn't appear to be any
>>
>> way of 'watching' that issue, so I hear about any updates, or indeed
>>
>> implementations.
>
>  Enable notifications? In the top right?

Re: Feature request: Attachments in todo 3 months ago

From Norman Gray to ~sircmpwn/sr.ht-discuss

Drew and all, greetings.

On 20 Oct 2021, at 7:48, Drew DeVault wrote:

> There's already a ticket for this:
>
> https://todo.sr.ht/~sircmpwn/todo.sr.ht/197
>
> Now that we have object storage support, I'm more open to this idea.

Ooops -- sorry.  I was sure I'd searched the bugparade for previous reports of the issue, but I clearly missed it.

This may be another feature request, but there doesn't appear to be any way of 'watching' that issue, so I hear about any updates, or indeed implementations.  Or indeed of saying '+1'.  Apart from their immediate uses, both of those are quite good ways of getting a sense of a project, via its repository activity.

Re: Feature request: Attachments in todo 3 months ago

From Norman Gray to ~sircmpwn/sr.ht-discuss

Joshua, hello.

On 19 Oct 2021, at 17:50, Joshua Mulliken wrote:

> You could use the paste.sr.ht site to upload your source file and link that to the todo.

A good point.  And I see the attraction of having orthogonal services here.

One could do that, yes, but:

(i) It looks like it's intended for text pastes, so attaching a PDF would be hard.

(ii) It's an extra step, so increases the friction of creating an issue.

Feature request: Attachments in todo 3 months ago

From Norman Gray to ~sircmpwn/sr.ht-discuss

Greetings.

At present, the todo system doesn't seem to support adding attachments to issues (or if it does, I can't work out to do it).  It would be useful to add this.

My particular case was a user reporting a problem with a LaTeX style file, the source code of which is (as of recently) maintained on sourcehut (~nxg/showlabels).  They sent email directly to me, and I went to create a corresponding issue, partly to explore the interface.

Attachments are useful in this case, and positively encouraged when reporting LaTeX-adjacent bugs: a .tex file to say 'this is a minimum demonstration of the bug', and a PDF to show 'this is what happens on my install'.

Best wishes,

Norman