this post was submitted on 06 Mar 2024
391 points (96.9% liked)

Programmer Humor

32718 readers
232 users here now

Post funny things about programming here! (Or just rant about your favourite programming language.)

Rules:

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[โ€“] [email protected] 8 points 9 months ago (1 children)

I think the difference is the intent of who will use the program.

Is the intended user the developer themselves and that's about it but they're making it available for others? Then just having the code is fine. It should still be properly documented however. Devs forgot their own shit code all the time, the documentation is there for them as well when they forget or come back to a project years later.

However if the program is intended for use by people outside the developers, then a regularly updated compiled binary should be expected. They are likely already going to be compiling it for themselves, making that process produce an updated binary release in GitHub isn't too much to ask for something intended for others to use that the dev is already likely making anyway.

[โ€“] [email protected] 6 points 9 months ago

I see your point, but you likely also need to be compiling multiple versions for different architectures and OSes. If you offer an exe someone will turn up asking for a msi, etc, etc.

In theory, you can get this automated, but then you're requiring a dev to learn and maintain these tools instead of working on their project.

I do edit and spell check my posts because I believe that when posting something (text, software, etc) it's proper to make it easy to consume, without forcing dozens/hundreds/thousands of people to fix your errors. I would expect these things, but I don't demand these things, and I think it's inexcusably entitled for anyone to do so.