[HN Gopher] Sourcehut will not blacklist the Go module mirror ___________________________________________________________________ Sourcehut will not blacklist the Go module mirror Author : MaxBarraclough Score : 128 points Date : 2023-01-31 20:31 UTC (2 hours ago) (HTM) web link (sourcehut.org) (TXT) w3m dump (sourcehut.org) | jiripospisil wrote: | See, it _is_ possible to make Google do some changes. You just | have report the issue, wait a year, get banned, write a blog | post, wait another year, and announce a block of their service. | Easy. | ocdtrekkie wrote: | And you have to be large enough or known enough in the first | place that Google cares whether or not you block their service. | ;) | tptacek wrote: | It does not appear to be the case that he was banned for | anything about this issue. | Gigachad wrote: | Didn't google offer to immediately fix the issue for Sourcehut | as a quick fix until they got the full fix out, and Drew | declined stating Google needs to either fix the problem | entirely or be blocked? | 2h wrote: | thats a cop out. If he accepted the quick fix, then Go team | could just say "well it works for him, so now we dont need to | do the full fix", or maybe they decide to slow play it. It | was nearly two years, enough is enough. | tptacek wrote: | Is that actually true? Does the timeline of the change the | Go team is rolling out corroborate the claim? | 2h wrote: | did you read the update to the article, as it answers | that question | tptacek wrote: | Can you be more specific? Is it updated in multiple | places? | arp242 wrote: | I don't agree with that at all. The "real fix" just took | time; you can argue it took "too much time", but, well, | lots of things do. They _were_ working on a long-term | solution, and offering a short-term solution while that 's | being worked on is reasonable. Certainly better than doing | nothing at all. | | The main problem is none of this was communicated very | well. | MaxBarraclough wrote: | Don't forget the all important _Hacker News front page_ step. | 2h wrote: | Props to Drew. | | People can talk about his personality all day, and historically | yes, it has been warranted. But he did the exact right thing in | this situation. He could have taken the easy way out, and just | had the Go team add his site as an exception. But he didn't do | that. He held true to his word and made plans to shut down the | proxy, even knowing that it would hurt his own project. He gave | them MORE than enough time to make this right, nearly two years. | Because of his actions, now ALL small sites will benefit from it. | | Credit where credits due. You're a jerk Drew, but thanks for your | work on this. | vfclists wrote: | Adherence to principles does not make a person a jerk. | | If anything there should be more people like this if the world | is going to be a better place. | vladharbuz wrote: | Drew is not a jerk, and I have not seen him type jerk-like | comments in quite a while. | omginternets wrote: | Why is Drew a jerk? | siver_john wrote: | He can have some very strong opinions which he has | acknowledged in his most recent blog post and that can rub | people the wrong way. But all my personal interactions with | him (not that there have been many) have been pleasant. | tut-urut-utut wrote: | If he's pleasant how he can be a jerk at the same time. | Because of the strong opinions you don't agree with? | jpgvm wrote: | In this day and age many people can't handle strong | opinions. | | In my experience Drew is a lovely person both online and | offline so to each their own I guess. | saghm wrote: | I don't know the person under discussion other than | seeing him occasionally mentioned on this site, so I have | no basis for an opinion about him, but speaking | generally, being a jerk doesn't mean some has to treat | _everyone_ poorly; sometimes being a jerk to only some | people is still enough to qualify someone as a jerk. As a | made up example, a boss who plays favorites by letting | their cronies get away with being lazy or not following | rules but makes trouble for anyone outside their inner | who slips up even slightly is a jerk, even though they | don't act like one to their favored few (who would | probably protest vigorously at the suggestion that their | boss is a jerk). | arp242 wrote: | Of course people can be pleasant one day and a jerk the | next. This seems so obvious to me I don't even know how | to explain it. | | It was far more than just "strong opinions you don't | agree with". I saw that he apologized for some of that, | and my interactions were some years ago, so I'm not | inclined to cite specific examples here - there's no need | to drag up people's past sins if they're trying to move | beyond that. But he really has been a right jerk at times | in the past - to me personally, and to others - and from | what I've seen it seems Drew today would agree with at | least some of that too. | | We all have our flaws; it's part of the human condition. | What I always found far more objectionable is the exact | opposite: people willing to make excuses for him | _because_ they agreed with his views. Your comment is a | good example of that. I 'm a simply guy: if I see someone | being a jerk then I will think you're a jerk, whether I | agree or disagree with you or not (that said, I have to | admit I too have been biased here, and probably will be | in the future as well, but at least I'm trying, and open | to criticism and reflection on this). | siver_john wrote: | I never said he is a jerk, just why some might state he | is. There seems to be another comment replying to you | giving more justification. Also just because I've | personally found someone as pleasant doesn't mean that | they can't appear to be a jerk to others. I have friends | who think I'm absolutely wonderful, there are other | people who don't like me at all. Part of that is | differences in personalities/conditions under which we | met/etc, and I don't have nearly as much of the public | exposure as Drew has here. | morelisp wrote: | Since -reuse was added in August and originally planned much | earlier, it's unclear what Drew actually did, if anything, to | speed this up. | | In the meantime, he has opted to... only solve the problem (if | such a problem exists) for only SourceHut. | 2h wrote: | did you read the update in the article? The Go team contact | him directly and in private, as well as accepted | responsibility for the situation regarding all small sites, | not just SourceHut. So his actions did have an impact. | morelisp wrote: | I did read it. I also read Go 1.19's release notes when | they came out. I also read rsc's reply to the original | post. I cannot figure out how Drew went back in time to add | -reuse to Go 1.19 and proxy improvements to the Go team's | schedule prior to the Go team contacting him in private. | 2h wrote: | > Drew went back in time to add -reuse to Go 1.19 and | proxy improvements to the Go team's schedule | | where did anyone say that? | tptacek wrote: | You did, when you wrote the words "Because of his | actions", is I think what they're saying. | morelisp wrote: | Yes. As far as I can tell, the only relevant action sr.ht | did was to open #44577 originally. Everything else since | then appears to be sound and fury. | svnpenn wrote: | well, he could have done nothing, and where would we be? | if you say "exactly where we are now", I think you are | being dishonest with how the situation played out. | | No, he didn't write the code or make the schedule, but he | stood up and said "this is not right", and took steps to | protect his and other small sites. | tptacek wrote: | To be clearer: I think what's being said upthread is: Go | was making this change anyways. | | (I have no idea if that's true.) | cycomanic wrote: | I think the context you're missing is that Drew caused a | stink about this already back in 2021, the blacklisting | was just the last iteration of the saga. So I'm not sure | if his posting caused the Google team to rethink their | stance, but it certainly caused quite a bit of bad | publicity for Google. | morelisp wrote: | Yeah, next time I report a bug and it takes longer than | I'd like to get fixed while I refuse reasonable | mitigations and eventually get myself kicked out of the | project for other reasons, I hope I get props for | "holding true to my word, even knowing that it would hurt | my project" and "protecting smaller sites" (all one? of | them). | | > quite a bit of bad publicity for Google. | | lol | [deleted] | ddevault wrote: | This is indeed the main difference. The reason that agreed | that the plan was suitable was the combination of the | ongoing work on incorporating -reuse with the Go module | mirror and the Go teams decision to accept responsibility | for the traffic and to exercise their discretion in | moderating it for each affected third-party without | requiring them to explicitly reach out to Google to opt | out. Russ also graciously elaborated on the engineering | thought-process going on within the Go team the | implications of disabling the refresh on third-parties, | which had not been done prior to our communications in the | past couple of weeks. | | There's still work to be done, but so long as work is | moving forward and the Go team is communicative and pro- | active about addressing the problem, then our concerns were | satisfied, and I'm glad that we were able to address the | issue. | arp242 wrote: | I think the main thing is communication: it's now | communicated they're actually working on the problem, and | have been for a while. That was pretty unclear before. | | A few years ago we had some serious issues in our production | servers; shortly before it had all been converted to k8s by | one sysops guy, and while I could do _some_ things with it, I | was (and remain) far from an expert, so I contacted the guy | who set it all up to ask for help. He proceeded with some | explanations and then ... just disappeared. _Crickets_. I had | no idea if he was working on it or not. I didn 't have time | to sit down with a cup of coffee to carefully read | documentation and try things out - our fucking production | servers are down! I had no idea if he was looking in to it, | doing something else, went grocery shopping, was having a | wank, or what. No one in the team could contact him. | | It was very frustrating (the joys of remote work...) Just a | simple "I'm looking in to it" would have sufficed. I didn't | need any details, you can tell me those later, just tell me | you're working on it. | | This situation is kind of similar: there wasn't any real | indication it was being worked on at all, or even that people | were considering working on it. There was some discussion, | and then just ... nothing. It turned out it was being worked | on - but that really wasn't obvious. It seemed like the issue | was essentially ignored. It wasn't, but that's how it | appeared. | | A lot of frustration could have been avoided by communicating | a little bit better. These sort of things often fall by the | wayside, because none of us are telepathic (AFAIK anyway) and | people misjudge "oh, I thought that was obvious for you" all | the time. | 8organicbits wrote: | I'd be super curious to see what load GitHub was seeing from | this. There's a lot of focus on protecting smaller sites (who | presumably have less funding) but the amount of redundant network | traffic this generates must be quite large for other sites as | well. | | I'm also still questioning the need for the proxy in the first | place. | notpushkin wrote: | I think GitHub is special-cased somehow. | arp242 wrote: | The source for the proxy isn't available, but I'd be | surprised if this was the case, based on what the Go team has | written about this issue. They made some changes to allow | excluding sites from refresh traffic in 2021 in response to | this issue, but no mention of throttling or anything else. | And if GitHub is special-cased, I don't see why any other | site can't be special-cased either. | dang wrote: | Recent and related: | | _Sourcehut will blacklist the Go module mirror_ - | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34310674 - Jan 2023 (337 | comments) ___________________________________________________________________ (page generated 2023-01-31 23:00 UTC)