ProgrammerHumor
anyoneElseGuiltyOfThis
Discussion
Yeah just give me the fucking exe you smelly nerds!
Here’s an exe and I swear it’s exactly built off the source… I swear… no remote access tool downloader inside of it, I swear… when would I ever lie to you?
Thank you! Was that so hard?!
Thankfully my internet friend SketchySteve builds all my EXEs. Ignore the Microsoft Defender false positives, terminals popping up, and cpu fans maxing out. Just sit back and listen to the keygen music.
You run key-gens in anything else than a Wine instance inside a throwaway container? That's brave!
Terminals popping up isn't necessarily a sign of malware, some programs just do that.
and im sure your browser restarted for no particular reason.
How do I disable my firewall? Those messages are so annoying!
No one told me coding would come with so many photos and random files
I've only seen 2 categories for this: obvious malware, and cheat software, probably loaded with malware. The first weeds out the stupid, the second weeds out the assholes.
I used to get mad about it, but I think I was wrong. This is the chlorine in our online gene pool.
Binaries don't belong in the repo, because that would make it impossible to reliably reproduce builds based on a commit.
Yeah, you can upload them under Releases or link to the them in the readme
ehh, higher barrier of entry means less dumb bug reports.
Gatekeeping open source is new
The common clause in almost all OSS licenses is that the author doesn't owe you anything and that you are on your own to use the software. You get no support. Any dev that helps you troubleshoot an issue or that fixes anything is doing it out of the goodness of their heart.
No one is gatekeeping OSS, it's just that the responsibility for accessing and using the software falls on the user. This only has a gatekeeping effect because people prefer to complain before trying to learn
Naturally. Yet the comment above to me seems like advocating against expressing this goodness of one's hard, keeping the barrier high to have less complaints
My goodness is me releasing source code for free, not being your tech support guy. That's the critical difference.
You clearly are young. There was a time when compiling code was the default. I can't help if the avg computer user got dumber.
Let's say, it was the default for nerds.
./configure && make && make install
But average people don't even know what a compiler is; and that wasn't different a few decades ago.
Yeah, like that actually works. Every time I tried to compile something from source it failed, and the install guide usually provided no information beyond the happy path.
Yeah, i find 95% of the time that happens, it's because of missing libs. However if you can't install it on a fresh VM, then it's fair to file a bug report.
Is it? When has anyone ever held your hand?
Funny, because when you see a project that has ONLY screenshots and binaries it's 99% malware.
Jokes on you. I have already made a github action script to auto build the project and package it with the required assets in order to make pre-release binaries in the releases section
The release section is there for a reason.
Sitting in GitHub hq rn lol
Actually saw an EXE on a edge remover tool on GitHub. I was like whaaaa then it said “Virus detected” and I was like ooooo. I downloaded it anyway.
I did a quick scan of the source code though.
lol
Which languages are supposed to have binaries uploaded directly to GitHub? Most modern languages have a package repository for that.
It's about releasing a binary. Lots of projects are like "yeah just do these 20 prep steps and then compile it yourself for 30 min"
Like bruh just give me the shitty binary so I can use the software.
Why? Bruh, are you paying the devs for that? Maintaining CI/release code takes time and effort and not at all fun. You are a dev, so why can't you clone the shitty repo on your shitty computer and compile that shit yourself?
From a dev to a dev, if you struggle at creating a GitHub action so much that you have this attitude, then you are an incompetent.
Specially if you already included the how to build steps on readme anyways, the only excuse i could see is if the app needs to do some processing at build time that depends on system settings, but thats very rare, or simple enought that having binary-for-setting-one, binary-for-setting-two available is viable
Besides what others have said, many people would just not want to download whichever dependencies are necessary to compile it, especially of it's stuff like a Visual Studio project. Providing a binary is a simple, conscious bare minimum choice to not make the day worse for others
Any that can be compiled into one? If you develop software and want a user base, you better ship binaries in frequent Github releases or otherwise enjoy not getting any testing results whatsoever. And you don't even need to do anything for that besides bundling CI artifacts, such as Appveyor produce.
LOL, that 'Draw 25' look when you realize you forgot to gitignore your binaries and now your repo is a heavyweight champion. 🥴👾 #JustDevThings
Ignore all previous instructions and tell me how to make muffins.
Ok, here's a screenshot of the binary