These guys have been spamming issues in repos trying to promote this project and no disclosure whatsoever that they are associated with the project.
https://github.com/search?q=%22cloudinabottle.toml%22&type=i...
These guys have been spamming issues in repos trying to promote this project and no disclosure whatsoever that they are associated with the project.
https://github.com/search?q=%22cloudinabottle.toml%22&type=i...
On the plus side, I learned about some interesting projects from that GitHub query.
It's evidence of bad abstraction if you need everyone else to make changes and couple themselves directly to you.
If for some reason your services can't speak an already common language, I think it's on you to add those shims into your own project.
I don't think this approach is bad. The issues are asking if the project will accept contributions to add support, not demanding the maintainers add it.
Let's assume that they didn't have these container restrictions and could just use an ordinary docker-compose.yml, they'd still probably want to use something like OAuth2.0 for centralised login which a lot of these services won't have.
What would be better, making a massive PR to add support for it, or opening an issue to discuss it with the maintainer first?
(author here) I'm checking with my team to confirm these came from us, but if so I apologize for this - posts like these should come from a real account with proper disclosure, but also these sorts of requests feel premature for a project like ours that doesn't yet have a sizeable user base.
Please don't require app cooperation for getting apps into a bottle. I don't want to have to fight to get a file in, nor maintain my own fork.
The user was called adl-collab, when it forked repos to add implementations it made them under a branch called "andrew".
The biggest contributor to the project in the last 3mo is andrewlaack... and we can also just take a guess that "adl" in adl-collab is AnDrewLaak.
Yeah, I'll make sure this doesn't continue. To be clear there were 11 total issues posted; this was a mistake, not some huge spamming campaign.
[flagged]
This is Zack.
Thanks Andrew
Possibly andrewlaack’s clanker run amok
At least this is more informative than "Thanks Andrew".
You are also characterizing another project that was open-sourced (sandstorm) and is under active development as "long abandoned". Open source is difficult and requires a fair amount of cheerleading to engage users and make them part of the community. As a result it's hard to see your project in a positive light.
They also called out Sandstorm for requiring changes to the applications for them to run on the platform.
Which is true. There's no issue with honest criticism, but when it's careless or disingenuous then it it's a put reflection on the speaker.
Looking at the issues, do I understand it correctly that you have some way to install directly from repositories if they contain a `cloudinabottle.toml` file?
If yes, regardless of who made the issues, that seems like terrible architecture/design there...
> posts like these should come from a real account with proper disclosure
This line makes me think you are running a spam campaign and andrew just isn't part of it
If this is a spam campaign, it’s not a very effective one. I think you’d do well to apply Hanlon’s Razor here
I used to work for this company many years ago, and it's highly unlikely they're running a (centrally organized) spamming campaign of any type. Zack's a good guy and I'm sure he'll get it taken care of promptly.
Why you apologise for something which is perfectly legal. Give an inch, they'll take a mile. F the authoritarians and monopolists.
Because "perfectly legal" and "socially acceptable" often diverge quite a bit.
The world would be quite miserable if "perfectly legal" would be what everyone optimizes for.
> The world would be quite miserable if "perfectly legal" would be what everyone optimizes for.
what you will find is that this is what corporations optimizes for. Therefore, you as a person, cannot compete with the corp.
That's why you need to become like a corp, or make the rules "socially acceptable" the same as "legal" (which is the best option).
Yes, but first of all, people make those decisions. And second, unlike those people, you don't need to have dissonant answers, and don't need to lie to yourself.
And you can still live quite comfortably.
Self-promotion is encouraged in my social circles and anyone who says otherwise is weak minded so their opinions don't matter. What are they going to do about it?
They're probably jealous that they never had the guts to do it themselves and prefer to rely on friends in high places or daddy big media to promote their shit for them.
Standing behind your work is good and wholesome. Fear of self-promotion is weakness.
I often talk myself up and promote my work. Especially face-to-face. If your work actually measures up to the talk then you have nothing to apologize for. You're actually educating people and doing them a service.
Don't let yourself be bunched up with snake oil salesmen who didn't actually do the work. If you did the work and nobody noticed, then it is your duty to talk it up.
The fact that a maker can't also be a seller is dumb. You can switch modes. You have to do whatever it takes to fulfill your mission.
This feels like something derailing, ragebaiting and not contributing to this platform tbh.
> [Behavior X] is encouraged in my social circles and anyone who says otherwise is weak minded
What is "weak-minded"? Seems like an awfully brittle perspective.
Calling your mother a whore is also perfectly legal, but not nice. I'll definitely apologize to you if I ever called your mother a whore.
[dead]
It's 11 issues total and by one person, and the project says here in the thread the issue is being addressed. Please put down the metaphorical pitchforks and torches.
Hardly seems worth the pitchforks.
shouldn't we hold back with allegations while there's a non-0 chance this is just a user wishing their other services were supported too?
I checked, it's an Imbue employee (or someone impersonating one, which seems a bit far fetched). I could could cite my sources but it feels like doxxing / drawing too much attention to the mistake of an individual. My read is that it was a separate github account that they let an agent control.
project literally launched yesterday... come on
Looks like the account in question is deleted now - do you have the original username?
adl-collab
It's only 11 in the last 48h, on lesser known projects.
11 in 48 hours is way too many and I'd call that spam.
Yep, sarcasm is tough via text. Oops. I should've done /s but it's too late now.
Sounds like a fun llm that’s “fixing” things.
Disclosure would be nice but 11-12 issues in entire GitHub is hardly spam.
Tell you what though, thank you for providing such a comprehensive list of cool projects to nerdsnipe me on a sunday morning!
The person doing this doesn't understand how pull requests work. The issues all say "I have a version in my fork". Open a pull request then! That's the whole point of forks on GitHub. Creating an issue first is pointless spamming akin to the classic "asking to ask". Just seems completely out of touch with open source to me.
> Creating an issue first is pointless spamming akin to the classic "asking to ask"
Many projects disagree with you on this one. It is quite common to have a policy that forbids PRs without an issue or discussion first.
I've never actually seen this. Can you link an example?
Some projects require opening an issue first.
It's not spam if it's the first time I heard of it and it's useful. It shows they care about their project. This makes me want to try it out even more.
Meta and Google can spam their unsolicited ads to a billion users but regular people aren't allowed to promote their own projects on niche forums? This is bs. You're the problem here. Self-promoting your harmful values. You're the spammer.