[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)