<?xml version="1.0"?>
<rss version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>phraktured.net</title>
    <link>http://phraktured.net/</link>
    <description>phrakture's blagh</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <copyright>Copyright 2007, Aaron Griffin</copyright>
    <managingEditor>aaronmgriffin@gmail.com</managingEditor>
    <webMaster>aaronmgriffin@gmail.com</webMaster>
    <pubDate>2008-04-15T18:57:24.065691</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>2008-04-15T18:57:24.065691</lastBuildDate>
    <docs>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss</docs>
    <generator>pyrus</generator>
    
    <item>
        <title>Comments Enabled</title>
        <link>http://phraktured.net/comments-enabled.html</link>
        <author>griff</author>
        <category>blog comments</category>
        <description>
        <![CDATA[
            
<p>So I sat down and slapped together some comment-ability for this blog. Not that
   it's really needed, or anything.
</p>
<p>I am using <a href="http://disqus.com">disqus</a> because it allows me to push all the
   comment management stuff offsite. Hooray!
</p>



        ]]>
        </description>
        <pubDate>2008-04-15T18:55:18</pubDate>
        <guid>http://phraktured.net/comments-enabled.html#2008-04-15T18:55:18</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
        <title>Patching, patching, patching</title>
        <link>http://phraktured.net/patching-patching-patching.html</link>
        <author>griff</author>
        <category>packages</category>
        <category>arch</category>
        <description>
        <![CDATA[
            
<p>There's a lot of backstory here, that I'm going to ignore. This is not a rant,
   or a personal attack, or a justification. I want to explain the way <strong>I see
things</strong> and where I want to take them.
</p>
<p>When I began using Arch, we had the philosophy that we were &quot;as vanilla as
   possible&quot;. This means that we trusted the upstream developers. If an Arch user
   wanted featureX, they contact the upstream developers, asked for featureX.
   Whatever upstream's decision, yes or no, we went along with it. We did NOT add
   the feature to our package anyway.
</p>
<p>When I began using Arch, we had the philosophy in mind to &quot;Keep It Simple,
   Stupid&quot;. This means that if things were too complex, we did it another way, or
   didn't do it ourselves. Someone wanted custom hardware modules? They could build
   them themselves.
</p>
<p>When I began this all, we kept things as simple as we could, and allowed (and
   actually <em>encouraged</em>) people to change things they wanted to. This was the core
   of Arch - if you don't like it, do it yourself. We told people &quot;If you don't
   like how the maintainer did that, use ABS and rebuild it&quot;. We told people, &quot;If
   you want a package for that, make it yourself&quot;. We had users that knew this, and
   worked in tandem with us. Some users provided custom repos, different PKGBUILDs,
   alternatives.
</p>
<p>This has all changed. For the worse. And it shows in the mentality of our
   patching. One user requests a feature, we apply a patch - we don't worry about
   upstream. One user has a brand-spanking new sound card, kernel gets patched. One
   user doesn't like a configure flag in a package, it gets changed.
</p>
<p>We can't continue like this. Arch wasn't made to sustain itself in this way.
   Arch was made to work in tandem with the users - users that can help themselves
   AND us. Arch was made to work <strong>with</strong> you, not <strong>for</strong> you.
</p>



        ]]>
        </description>
        <pubDate>2008-03-28T14:55:42</pubDate>
        <guid>http://phraktured.net/patching-patching-patching.html#2008-03-28T14:55:42</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
        <title>Moar Hardware!</title>
        <link>http://phraktured.net/moar-hardware.html</link>
        <author>griff</author>
        <category>hardware</category>
        <description>
        <![CDATA[
            
<p>You ever have so much money that you just need to waste it on buying new
   things? Me either. But, sometimes older hardware goes crazy and you need
   to buy more. Now is one of those times.
</p>
<p>I've been out of the hardware world for some time, so this is a call to anyone
   who is good at this sort of thing. I need help finding new hardware. Disks,
   RAM, that sort of crap - not a big issue, but I don't know what the status-quo
   is, nor do I know what top-of-the-line is.
</p>
<p>So what should I be buying? Quad core? AMD? Intel? What are the current trends
   in motherboard chipsets? Any hardware recommendations?
</p>
<p>Feel free to send me your recommendations over jabber, or email.
</p>
<p>Thanks in advance
</p>



        ]]>
        </description>
        <pubDate>2008-03-10T16:17:09</pubDate>
        <guid>http://phraktured.net/moar-hardware.html#2008-03-10T16:17:09</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
        <title>Job Hunt</title>
        <link>http://phraktured.net/job-hunt.html</link>
        <author>griff</author>
        <category>work</category>
        <description>
        <![CDATA[
            
<p>Ah, the job hunt. It's never really all that fun, and always stressful. Add on
   to that the fact that I am currently open to moving. A job in Chicago would be
   fine, but that's the path-of-least-resistance. So I've been looking in different
   areas.
</p>
<p>I had an interview in Boston recently, but I don't know if the area was really
   for me - when explaining it to <a href="http://toofishes.net">dan</a>, I used the term
   &quot;monocultural&quot;. Currently I'm taking a peek at Seattle and maybe places in
   California (ugh, expensive).
</p>
<p>So we'll see where this goes. I may or may not be moving across the country in
   the near future. Where to, however, is fuzzy at the moment
</p>



        ]]>
        </description>
        <pubDate>2008-02-18T11:35:32</pubDate>
        <guid>http://phraktured.net/job-hunt.html#2008-02-18T11:35:32</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
        <title>Box Death, and IRC</title>
        <link>http://phraktured.net/box-death-and-irc.html</link>
        <author>griff</author>
        <category>hardware</category>
        <category>irc</category>
        <description>
        <![CDATA[
            
<p>It's been an odd couple of days. I had decided to move a box from one outlet to
   another. Once everything was moved and plugged back in, I hit the power button
   only to be greeted by a high pitched whine and the smell of fire.
</p>
<p>Yeah, the power supply went kaput. So I pulled it out, and left the box sitting
   there. This just happened to be my &quot;always on&quot; machine which managed my
   torrents, had my music shares, ran phrik (the lovable #archlinux bot), and kept
   a running irc connection.
</p>
<p>Well, it's been a few days without perma-idling in IRC, and I've learned
   something. It makes me feel better to keep it off.
</p>
<p>Being ever-present in IRC makes me think &quot;man, I should check my IRC window,
   maybe something important happened / was said&quot;. This is simply not the case.
   Important things don't happen in IRC. Idle chatter does. Wasted time happens.
</p>
<p>So, when all is said and done, I've decided not to idle in IRC anymore. I will
   miss some of the #archers banter, but all-in-all this is for the best. 
</p>
<p>Now, I just need to go buy a new power supply. Oh, and a bigger disk. Oh, and
   some of those. Oh, and that too. No, no, I'll take three.
</p>



        ]]>
        </description>
        <pubDate>2008-02-13T12:54:14</pubDate>
        <guid>http://phraktured.net/box-death-and-irc.html#2008-02-13T12:54:14</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
        <title>Say Goodbye to Dreamhost</title>
        <link>http://phraktured.net/die-dreamhost.html</link>
        <author>www-data</author>
        <category>hosting</category>
        <description>
        <![CDATA[
            
<p>That's it. Dreamhost has given me too many minor headaches, so I'm moving off to
   Slicehost. I've purchased a 256slice and am in the process of setting everything
   up.
</p>
<p>Sadly, Arch wasn't an install option 8(
</p>
<p><strong>Update:</strong> Since this writing, Slicehost has added Arch slices. Awesomely
   enough, they are running Arch64! This means I will need to back up my slice, and
   get all the data off here, and then reimage. Luckily, my blog and everything is
   a bunch of static files. Yay!
</p>



        ]]>
        </description>
        <pubDate>2007-11-15T12:25:30</pubDate>
        <guid>http://phraktured.net/die-dreamhost.html#2007-11-15T12:25:30</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
        <title>Archway</title>
        <link>http://phraktured.net/arch-way.html</link>
        <author>www-data</author>
        <category>arch</category>
        <category>development</category>
        <category>philosophy</category>
        <description>
        <![CDATA[
            
<p><a href="http://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/The_Arch_Way">The Arch Way</a> is a document
   that has been around for some time. It defines the core Archlinux philosophy -
   what makes us tick.
</p>
<p>Here is my take on that document. My version of what we provide the user.
</p>
<blockquote><p>In short, the Arch Way is about simplicity and giving control to the user.
   Keeping things simple, and agile.
</p>
<p>Arch is lightweight and simple, like clay - able to be molded by the user as they choose.
</p>
<p>Arch is not a distribution made for &quot;user friendliness&quot;. It is a distribution
   designed to be a platform - a &quot;base&quot; for the user to do what they want. This
   means that we don't try to force a user's hand into our way of doing things,
   with our configuration tools, and our ideas. It should be about <em>their</em> ideas.
</p>
<p>It is important who controls the system here: the user. Developers suggest
   things, and push in certain directions, but let the user do as they wish.
</p>
<p>Arch is a base for anyone to make into whatever they see fit. Arch is a tool.
</p>
<p>Use it well
</p>
</blockquote><p>Furthermore, the driving philosophy behind Arch is provided in this document.
   Here, again, is my take on this (really just reworded).
</p>
<ul>
 <li><p>Keep It Simple, Stupid: A simple design is usually the most elegant (See also
     <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occam's_Razor">Occam's Razor</a>)
</p>

 </li>

 <li><p>'Simple' is defined from a technical standpoint, not a usability standpoint.
     It is better to be technically elegant with a higher learning curve, than to
     be easy to use, and technically crap.
</p>

 </li>

 <li><p>Relying on complex tools to manage and build your system is going to hurt the
     end users. Maintenance and upgrading should be an active process, not a
     passive one.
</p>

 </li>

 <li><p>&quot;If you try to hide the complexity of the system, you'll end up with a more
     complex system&quot;. Layers of abstraction that serve to hide internals are never a
     good thing. Instead, the internals should be designed in a way such that they
     NEED no hiding.
</p>

 </li>

 <li><p>We can't help you. Yes this is a philosophical point. Every Arch user is
     expected to be able to help themselves - to be able to look up information,
     configuration files, bugs, etc. You're expected to be able to do a little
     research when you have a problem. Teach a man to fish, and all that.
</p>

 </li>

 <li><p>We are, above all, a community oriented distro. Contributions and effort from
     the end users should never be discouraged.
</p>

 </li>

 <li><p>Unlike other distros, Arch is not primarily concerned about the user. The user
     is important, sure, but most important are simplicity and elegance. The user
     is important as long as it does not interfere with these doctrines.
</p>

 </li>

 <li><p>&quot;It is what you make it&quot; -- Judd Vinet
</p>

 </li>
</ul>



        ]]>
        </description>
        <pubDate>2007-11-09T16:49:12</pubDate>
        <guid>http://phraktured.net/arch-way.html#2007-11-09T16:49:12</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
        <title>Oh oh! A Banner!</title>
        <link>http://phraktured.net/a-banner-has-you.html</link>
        <author>www-data</author>
        <category>art blog</category>
        <description>
        <![CDATA[
            
<p>Look up there! It's a new fancy banner made by
   our good friend <a href="http://rubydolcevita.blood-lotus.com">cerise</a>
</p>
<p>Hooray!
</p>



        ]]>
        </description>
        <pubDate>2007-11-05T19:35:56</pubDate>
        <guid>http://phraktured.net/a-banner-has-you.html#2007-11-05T19:35:56</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
        <title>Development Methodology</title>
        <link>http://phraktured.net/development-methodology.html</link>
        <author>www-data</author>
        <category>devel</category>
        <category>arch</category>
        <description>
        <![CDATA[
            
<p>With the advent of the &quot;new leaf&quot; for Arch, I figure it's time to explain, to
   those of you who don't know me that well, how I go about this development thing.
</p>
<p>See, I have one defining principle that is covered pretty well in the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Python_philosophy">Python
Philosophy</a>.
</p>
<blockquote><p>Now is better than never.
</p>
</blockquote><p>Really, this is a simplification of <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pareto_principle">Pareto's
principle</a> - also known as the
   80/20 rule.
</p>
<p>See, I am a strong supporter that completing 80% of the work that is &quot;easy&quot;
   as soon as possible and in a functional manner, is far better than waiting for
   100% completion.
</p>
<p>To make this an analogy: If I were building a house and it's the only shelter I
   had, I would rush to at least get the roof up. That's just a small portion of
   the work, but it is functional - I could sleep under it and all that fun stuff.
</p>
<p>When I try to explain this to people, I describe it like molding clay. If you
   are sculpting a 1:1 scale human being, out of clay, you don't start on just the
   ear, make it perfect, move to the cheek, make it perfect, etc. No. You take a
   lump and make it look <em>kinda</em> like a human, maybe add some small details, go
   over it with another pass, add some muscle definition, another pass to clean up
   some things and fix inaccuracies, and another pass for fine details.
</p>
<p>This is how I attack these things.
</p>
<p>You don't need a perfect fool-proof plan. It's impossible to make something
   fool-proof, because fools are so ingenious. Someone will always piss in your
   proverbial cereal. Accept it. Accept that 80% is just as good. Accept that the
   ear doesn't need to be perfectly defined right away.
</p>



        ]]>
        </description>
        <pubDate>2007-10-16T12:46:31</pubDate>
        <guid>http://phraktured.net/development-methodology.html#2007-10-16T12:46:31</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
        <title>A Life in Flux</title>
        <link>http://phraktured.net/new-leaf.html</link>
        <author>www-data</author>
        <category>archlinux</category>
        <category>life</category>
        <description>
        <![CDATA[
            
<p>Ah, what a hectic time we're in.
</p>
<p>For those of you who don't monitor my every move (and why haven't you started?),
   there was some recent news involving my life:
</p>
<p><a href="http://archlinux.org/news/350/">Read this first</a>
</p>
<p>Yes. That means I'm now the &quot;big hat&quot; in the ArchLinux world. It's a mixed
   blessing - as a whole I think we both need and fear this sort of thing.
</p>
<p>But, that's how life works. When life gives you lemons, and all that. I'm here
   right now to give a sort of informal roadmap to anyone who may be watching. I
   figure this will percolate out to the community at some point, but this way I
   can keep the vision small and open for discussion.
</p>
<p>I plan on making some changes soon to the way ArchLinux is run as a whole, and I
   guess I'll kinda give a preview here.
</p>
<p>See, something like this is easy when you have 3 or 4 people, with
   similar goals and ideals. But when you hit 30 or so developers, that's when you
   run ashore. What you need, at that point, is something to keep everyone in line,
   something to keep everyone from going off on different tangents.
</p>
<p>You need <strong>Process</strong>.
</p>
<p>I know. It's a frightening word for anyone who has ever worked in a heavy
   corporate environment. But we need it. The more hands we have doing different
   things, the more opportunity we have to introduce human error.
</p>
<p>This process begins with the new [testing] repo policy. That is, if a package is
   in the core repository, it must always go to the testing repo and be &quot;signed
   off&quot; by another developer. It is more important to ensure the stability of the
   core repo than to have updates minutes after they are released.
</p>
<p>In the coming weeks, I am also planning on defining a set of &quot;roles&quot; or &quot;teams&quot;
   for our developers. Right now, everyone is just a generic &quot;I do everything&quot; guy.
   Again, this works when you are small, but doesn't work anymore. Everyone can't
   and <strong>shouldn't</strong> do everything.
</p>
<p>So what we gain is a set of specialists instead of a group of generalists.
   Instead of &quot;I work on ArchLinux&quot;, it's &quot;I work on <x> for ArchLinux&quot;.
</p>
<p>More to come, don't worry.
</p>



        ]]>
        </description>
        <pubDate>2007-10-15T17:04:14</pubDate>
        <guid>http://phraktured.net/new-leaf.html#2007-10-15T17:04:14</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>
