I read this as an argument for using emacs. Especially
I can get a lot done quickly with jardiff because its sourcecode exists in my editor when I use it.
Similarly, on
imbalance between the Developer and the User signified by who’s code gets to be part of the binary
There's a java/compiled-artifact lens that I think is conflating or creating two groups. For interpreted languages, there doesn't have to be a split. For lispy or REPL first languages -- like elisp -- even less so.
I think the author is using "release" to mean generated an executable artifact. But I'd argue making the source available as they've done is the actual release. The custom editing not available in a binary but advocated for hits directly at FSF free software definition for freedom 1 "...and change it so it does your computing as you wish"
With interpreted languages the "developer" still has somewhat of a social responsibility to not break the internal API completely or any code bolted on will also have to be rewritten. For me personally that's enough pressure to not bother releasing certain things.
Yes to a certain degree but technically there’s a well documented and largely accepted way to deal with API breakage, i.e. increase the major version number ala Semver.
wwfn | 13 hours ago
I read this as an argument for using emacs. Especially
Similarly, on
There's a java/compiled-artifact lens that I think is conflating or creating two groups. For interpreted languages, there doesn't have to be a split. For lispy or REPL first languages -- like elisp -- even less so.
I think the author is using "release" to mean generated an executable artifact. But I'd argue making the source available as they've done is the actual release. The custom editing not available in a binary but advocated for hits directly at FSF free software definition for freedom 1 "...and change it so it does your computing as you wish"
manfred | 10 hours ago
With interpreted languages the "developer" still has somewhat of a social responsibility to not break the internal API completely or any code bolted on will also have to be rewritten. For me personally that's enough pressure to not bother releasing certain things.
ur5us | 8 hours ago
Yes to a certain degree but technically there’s a well documented and largely accepted way to deal with API breakage, i.e. increase the major version number ala Semver.