Homebrew RELEASE GoldBricks NSP/NSZ Title Installer

[blawar]

And here we see the sham exposed for what it is.

When someone confronts you with an issue for your fork, your answer is to point to a completely different program and to report it to the upstream developer.

It would be funny if I didn't know you were serious about it, that just makes it sad.

All he has to do is convert the NSZ to NSP, try it with goldleaf (it wont work), then report it to xortroll. I am not asking xortroll to support my app. I am just trying to not waste my time debugging an issue that xortroll is already aware of, and is hopefully trying to fix. GoldBricks is open source, you are welcome to submit a PR to fix the issue.

I am committed to maintaining the fork by pulling in upstream updates as @XorTroll publishes them, not to actually fixing his bugs. I apologize if this was not made abundantly clear. The extent of my involvement with GoldBricks is to ensure it is updated with goldleaf, and to support / bugfix NSZ and Nut related code.

 

[Ev1l0rd]

All he has to do is convert the NSZ to NSP, try it with goldleaf (it wont work), then report it to xortroll. I am not asking xortroll to support my app. I am just trying to not waste my time debugging an issue that xortroll is already aware of, and is hopefully trying to fix. GoldBricks is open source, you are welcome to submit a PR to fix the issue.

I am committed to maintaining the fork by pulling in upstream updates as @XorTroll publishes them, not to actually fixing his bugs. I apologize if this was not made abundantly clear. The extent of my involvement with GoldBricks is to ensure it is updated with goldleaf, and to support / bugfix NSZ and Nut related code.

You've made a hard fork. This much is evident from the name change, the dedicated thread and the general attitude you're taking in the thread.

If you hard fork, that makes you the new de facto maintainer for the fork. With a hard fork, the intent is often to specifically distance yourself from the original maintainer, which you implicitly have stated several times in this thread.

You suggesting that issues should be reported to XorTroll (the original maintainer) is not what you would be doing if your attempt wasn't as transparently disingenuous as it is.

 

[blawar]

You've made a hard fork. This much is evident from the name change, the dedicated thread and the general attitude you're taking in the thread.

If you hard fork, that makes you the new de facto maintainer for the fork. With a hard fork, the intent is often to specifically distance yourself from the original maintainer, which you implicitly have stated several times in this thread.

You suggesting that issues should be reported to XorTroll (the original maintainer) is not what you would be doing if your attempt wasn't as transparently disingenuous as it is.

I do not think you have read the source code, or you would know its a soft fork. I isolated almost all of my changes to their own, new files (other than goldleaf ->goldbricks string replaces). I lightly hooked the installation process. It is trivial for me to pull in upstream changes, which I intend to do.

 

[TheZander]

Is this a jokey homebrew thing? It's like a spoof right and isn't actually a new thing? What's a nsz and how could there be another format?

 

[OLineGuy]

Is this a jokey homebrew thing? It's like a spoof right and isn't actually a new thing? What's a nsz and how could there be another format?

It is goldleaf but now supports nsz installation. Google for answers to your other questions. Been answered ten fold

 

[Ev1l0rd]

I do not think you have read the source code, or you would know its a soft fork. I isolated almost all of my changes to their own, new files (other than goldleaf ->goldbricks string replaces). I lightly hooked the installation process. It is trivial for me to pull in upstream changes, which I intend to do.

Soft or hard fork isn't defined by how easy it is for you to pull the original upstream.

It's the mentality behind it. Most people would call GNU Icecat a hard fork from Firefox, since it is branded and recommended as a different project, in spite of the fact that Icecat is just a couple of patches applied to the Firefox source code, which by your definition would be seen as a soft fork.

 

[Ashura66]

Is this a jokey homebrew thing? It's like a spoof right and isn't actually a new thing? What's a nsz and how could there be another format?

NSZ is a heavily compressed NSP basically. It takes up much less space which makes it perfect for downloading via a shop app such as HBG shop, JITS or BigPP. That's the jist of it

 

[RisingHopperZeroOne]

edit: i misread what you were asking. i can enable nsp installation for applet mode, while forcing title mode for nsz that is easy.

Thanks so much, it's not a big feature but it's something I wanted.
Also just because it somewhat bothered me, purely asthetic thing but could I edit the image so the lego brick be the same color as the gold in the logo? I know it's not anything important but it kinda stood out to me.

@Ev1l0rd but that is an issue with goldleaf not the fork, the fork has the same issues as the original unless blawar decided to take the time to fix them. I don't see the problem here.

 

[Ev1l0rd]

but that is an issue with goldleaf not the fork, the fork has the same issues as the original unless blawar decided to take the time to fix them. I don't see the problem here.

To put it very simply, there are two kinds of forks: Soft forks and hard forks.

• Soft forks are just small forks that purely exist as a side effect on how git works. They usually have limited changes in code and fully intent to PR their changes up to the upstream. They don't rebrand, they don't change their name, they just exist as forks that get PRed to upstream eventually and frequently don't have releases. If there's a bug in a soft fork, it can be reported to the upstream since the soft fork doesn't ever release as a stable version.
  
• Hard forks are pretty much the opposite of a soft fork. They're a fork that has features that aren't in the upstream of the fork and don't intent to PR their changes back to that upstream. Frequently, to avoid trademark buggery, they rebrand themselves and are distributed under a different name. They also almost always have releases. If there's a bug in a hard fork, it should be reported to the hard fork maintainer, since the hard fork maintainer is essentially running a completely different project and any connection to the upstream is purely a historical one (even if they regularly pull in changes from the upstream).

Blawar should basically own up to any and all bugs that exist in the current Goldbricks codebase and fix them, otherwise he isn't properly fixing the bugs in his own software. He definetly shouldn't be redirecting issues to XorTroll.

 

[RisingHopperZeroOne]

@blawar thought I try making the banner I asked of you, thoughts?

@Ev1l0rd he can't pr his changes back because Xortroll doesn't want to support nsz, he even said he would be happy to pr the nsz stuff and not maintain the fork.

 

[Ev1l0rd]

@Ev1l0rd he can't pr his changes back because Xortroll doesn't want to support nsz, he even said he would be happy to pr the nsz stuff and not maintain the fork.

It's still his choice to respond with a hard fork to XorTroll not supporting nsz.

 

[OLineGuy]

It's still his choice to respond with a hard fork to XorTroll not supporting nsz.

People wanted goldleaf with nsz support, this is what goldbricks gives them. Now you want him to fix Goldleaf for Xor? get the fuck otta here. I dont care what kinda fork it is, let xor fix his own shitty app

 

[nicoboss]

GoldBricks finally made it into the Homebrew App Store today! That's so awesome.

 

[blawar]

@blawar thought I try making the banner I asked of you, thoughts?

@Ev1l0rd he can't pr his changes back because Xortroll doesn't want to support nsz, he even said he would be happy to pr the nsz stuff and not maintain the fork.

Banner looks great, do you want to PR it to the repo so you get credit?

 

[ganons]

@blawar any plans for sx os to load xcz like it does xci? Now that would save a lot of space on the sd card.

 

[blawar]

@blawar any plans for sx os to load xcz like it does xci? Now that would save a lot of space on the sd card.

I saw a SX mod post a wish list with XCZ support on it, so they are at least aware. However I do not know anymore information. Once I get @nicoboss ' new spec out to the title installers, my top priority will be adding NSZ /XCZ support to Yuzu so there is that to look forward to

 

[RisingHopperZeroOne]

Banner looks great, do you want to PR it to the repo so you get credit?

Sure, I can do that.

Hope I did it right, not an expert at using github.

Also if you want more logo related things done I can take a look at it.

 

[Ev1l0rd]

People wanted goldleaf with nsz support, this is what goldbricks gives them. Now you want him to fix Goldleaf for Xor? get the fuck otta here. I dont care what kinda fork it is, let xor fix his own shitty app

No, I'm saying he is redirecting people who have issues with his sham fork to XorTroll, who fundamentally operates a different tool than him (which is the idea behind a hard fork) and that he shouldn't do that.

This is because Goldbricks is not Goldleaf. Any issues in this fork are at the onus of blawar since blawar is effectively the developer of Goldbricks since he hard forked it.

"Let xor fix his own [...] app" -> Nice in theory, but as it stands the bug is in Goldbricks, which XorTroll does not develop.

 

[blawar]

Sure, I can do that.

Hope I did it right, not an expert at using github.

Also if you want more logo related things done I can take a look at it.

Looks good, thanks. Feel free to take any artistic liberties with any of the assets / logos. I am not a graphics designer

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------

No, I'm saying he is redirecting people who have issues with his sham fork to XorTroll, who fundamentally operates a different tool than him (which is the idea behind a hard fork) and that he shouldn't do that.

This is because Goldbricks is not Goldleaf. Any issues in this fork are at the onus of blawar since blawar is effectively the developer of Goldbricks since he hard forked it.

"Let xor fix his own [...] app" -> Nice in theory, but as it stands the bug is in Goldbricks, which XorTroll does not develop.

I know you are trolling, but I am saying this for other users to better understand the situation. I am trying to keep the changes to the goldleaf source to an absolute minimum, because the more I diverge from the source, the more difficult and less likely it will be for me to pull in upstream changes from goldleaf. Asking me to to do bug fixes to core goldleaf code that xortroll wont accept will only make the fork more divergent and make it more difficult to keep up with goldleaf. The correct avenue is to get xortroll to fix the bug, then I will pull in the bugfix from goldleaf.

The only purpose of this fork, is to add NSZ support to it and pull in upstream changes, not to fix existing goldleaf bugs.

 

[mcmanic]

the thing is Goldleaf works with usb install using Quark that is supplied and your's does not work with Quark even reverting to your 1st release so thus i cannot install anything and yes i could convert to nsp but then what is the point of your release to anyone using the windows gui installer Quark