The author is using microsoft's git fork, they've added this new command just this summer: https://github.com/microsoft/git/pull/667
It more or less replaces the --full-name-hash option (again a very good cover letter that explains the differences and pros/cons of each very well!)
"EEE" isn't a magic incantation, it's the name of an actual policy with actual tangible steps that their executives were implementing back when the CEO thought open source was the greatest threat to their business model.
Microsoft contributing to a project doesn't automatically make it EEE. For one thing, EEE was about adopting open standards in proprietary software. Microsoft during EEE didn't publish GPL code like this is.
If Microsoft want to develop some proprietary extensions for VSCode it’s fine, everyone has this right. It has nothing to do with EEE.
The fix described in this post have been submitted as a patch to the official Git project. The fix is improving a legitimate inefficiency in Git, and does nothing towards "embracing", "extending", or "extinguishing" anything.
I'm not saying this shouldn't be merged, but I think people should be aware and see the early signs.
https://lore.kernel.org/git/7d43a1634bbe2d2efa96a806e3de1f1f...
it will look good, until the extensions get more and more proprietary- but absurdly useful.
Right now the most important thing for them is for people to start thinking the microsoft fork is the superior one, even if things are “backported”.
VS Code is the most common example people have, but it’s not the same: that’s always been their project so while I don’t love how some things like Pylance are not open it’s not like those were ever promised as such and the core product runs like a normal corporate open source project. It’s not like they formed Emacs and started breaking compatibility to prevent people from switching back and forth. One key conceptual difference is that code is inherently portable, unlike office documents 30 years ago – if VSC started charging, you could switch to any of dozens of other editors in seconds with no changes to your source code.
I would recommend thinking about your comment in the context of the boy who cried wolf. If people trot out EEE every time Microsoft does something in open source, it’s just lowering their credibility among anyone who didn’t say Micro$oft in the 90s and we’ll feel that loss when there’s a real problem.
* SMTP
* Kerberos (there was a time you could use KRB4 with Windows because AD is just krb4 with extensions: now you have to use AD).
* HTML (activex etc)
* CALDAV // CARDDAV
* Javas portability breakage
* MSN and AOL compatibility.
“oh, but its not the same”. It never is, which is why I didnt want to give examples and preferred you speak to someone who knows the history more than a tiny internet comment that is unable to convey proper context.
There are so many good things to criticize Microsoft for. When this is what people come with, it serves as a single of emotion-based ignorance and to ignore.
But you'll also be wrong a lot of the time.
This is not the Extend in EEE. We might get there, and we should be generally wary of microsoft, but this doesn't show that we're already there.
For more examples I would consult your local greybeard; since the pattern is broad enough that you can reasonably argue that “this time, its different” which is also what you hear every single time it happens.
Microsoft Embraced by making VSCode free and open source. Then they Extended by using their resources to make VSCode the go to open source IDE/Editor for most use cases and languages, killing much of the development momentum for none VSCode based alternatives. Now they're Extinguishing the competition by making it harder and harder to use the ostensibly open source VSCode codebase to build competing tools.
> Embrace: Development of software substantially compatible with an Open Standard.
> Extend: Addition of features not supported by the Open Standard, creating interoperability problems.
>Extinguish: When extensions become a de facto standard because of their dominant market share, they marginalize competitors who are unable to support the new extensions.
As I see it, there no open standard that Microsoft is rendering proprietary through VSCode. VSCode is their own product.
I see your point that VSCode may have stalled development of other open source editors, and has proprietary extensions... but I don't think really EEE fits. It's just competition.
I'm not totally sold on embrace-extemd-extinguish here, but learning about this case was eyebrow raising for me.
C# DevKit is however based on VS license. It builds on top of base C# extension, the core features like debugger, language server, auto-complete and auto-fixers integration, etc. are in the base extension.
I find these insightful reminders. Use the vanilla free versions if the difference is negligeble.
What's up with folks in Europe that they can't clone a big repo, but others can? Also it sounds like they still won't be able to clone, until the change is implemented on the server side?
> This meant we were in many occasions just pushing the entire file again and again, which could be 10s of MBs per file in some cases, and you can imagine in a repo
The sentence seems to be cut off.
Also, the gifs are incredibly distracting while trying to read the article, and they are there even in reader mode.
I read that as an anecdote, a more complete sentence would be "We had a story where someone from Europe couldn't clone the whole repo on his laptop for him to use on a journey across Europe because his disk is full at the time. He has since cleared up the disk and able to clone the repo".
I don't think it points to a larger issue with Europe not being able to handle 180GB files...I surely hope so.
(Bonus game: count the number of annual zero days they’re exposed to because each of those vendors still ships 90s-style C code)
Every once in a while, my router used to go crazy with seemingly packet loss (I think a memory issue).
Normal websites would become super slow for any pc or phone in the house.
But git… git would fail to clone anything not really small.
My fix was to unplug the modem and router and plug back in. :)
It took a long time to discover the router was reporting packet loss, and that the slowness the browsers were experiencing has to do with some retries, and that git just crapped out.
Eventually when git started misbehaving I restarted the router to fix.
And now I have a new router. :)
After COVID I had to set up a compressing proxy for Artifactory and file a bug with JFrog about it because some of my coworkers with packet loss were getting request timeouts that npm didn’t handle well at all. Npm of that era didn’t bother to check bytes received versus content-length and then would cache the wrong answer. One of my many, many complaints about what total garbage npm was prior to ~8 when the refactoring work first started paying dividends.
Thankfully, we do our work almost entirely in shallow clones inside codespaces so it's not a big deal. I hope the problems presented in the 1JS repro from this blog post are causing similar size blowout in our repo and can be fixed.
They might be in a country with underdeveloped internet infrastructure, e.g. Germany))
Both countries are behind e.g. Sweden or Russia, but Germany by a much larger margin.
There's some trickery done in official statistics (e.g. by factoring in private connections that are unavailable to consumers) to make this seem better than it is, but ask anyone who lives there and you'll be surprised.
The first option mentioned in the post (--window 250) reduced the size to 1.7GB. The new --path-walk option from the Microsoft git fork was less effective, resulting in 1.9GB total size.
Both of these are less than half of the initial size. Would be great if there was a way to get Github to run these, and even greater if people started hosting stuff in a way that gives them control over this ...
The explanation probably got lost among all the gifs, but the last 16 chars here are different:
> was actually only checking the last 16 characters of a filename > For example, if you changed repo/packages/foo/CHANGELOG.md, when git was getting ready to do the push, it was generating a diff against repo/packages/bar/CHANGELOG.md!
(See also the path-walk API cover letter: https://lore.kernel.org/all/pull.1786.git.1725935335.gitgitg...)
The example in the blog post isn't super clear, but Git was essentially taking all the versions of all the files in the repo, putting the last 16 bytes of the path (not filename) in a hash table, and using that to group what they expected to be different versions of the same file together for delta compression.
Indeed in the blog it doesn't work, because foo/CHANGELOG.md and bar/CHANGELOG.md is only 13 chars, but you have to imagine the paths have a longer common suffix. That part is fixed by the --full-name-hash option, now you compare the full path instead of just 16 bytes.
Then they talk about increasing the window size. That's kind of a hack to workaround bad file grouping, but it's not the real fix. You're still giving terrible inputs to the compressor and working around it by consuming huge amounts of memory. So that was a bit confusing to present it as the solution. The path walk API and/or --full-name-hash are the real interesting parts here =)
No, it is the full path that's considered. Look at the commit message on the first commit in the `--full-name-hash` PR:
https://github.com/git-for-windows/git/pull/5157/commits/d5c...
Excerpt: "/CHANGELOG.json" is 15 characters, and is created by the beachball [1] tool. Only the final character of the parent directory can differntiate different versions of this file, but also only the two most-significant digits. If that character is a letter, then this is always a collision. Similar issues occur with the similar "/CHANGELOG.md" path, though there is more opportunity for differences in the parent directory.
The grouping algorithm puts less weight on each character the further it is from the right-side of the name:
hash = (hash >> 2) + (c << 24)
Hash is 32-bits. Each 8-bit char (from the full path) in turn is added to the 8-most significant bits of hash, after shifting any previous hash bits to the right by two bits (which is why only the final 16 chars affect the final hash). Look at what happens in practice:https://go.dev/play/p/JQpdUGXdQs7
Here I've translated it to Go and compared the final value of "aaa/CHANGELOG.md" to "zzz/CHANGELOG.md". Plug in various values for "aaa" and "zzz" and see how little they influence the final value.
If we interpret it that way, that also explains why the filepathwalk solution solves the problem.
But if it’s really based on the last 16 characters of just the file name, not the whole path, then it feels like this problem should be a lot more common. At least in monorepos.
https://github.blog/author/dstolee/
See also his website:
Kudos to Derrick, I learnt so much from those!
> Retroactively, once the file is there though, it's semi stuck in history.
Arguably, the fix for that is to run filter-branch, remove the offending binary, teach and get everyone setup to use git-lfs for binaries, force push, and help everyone get their workstation to a good place.
Far from ideal, but better than having a large not-even-used file in git.
As someone else noted, this is about small, frequently changing files, so you could remove old versions from the history to save space, and use LFS going forward.
IME it takes less time to go from 100 modules to 200 than it takes to go from 50 to 100.
It's like hammering a nail through your hand, and then buying a different hammer with a softer handle to make it hurt less.
I don't know anyone who says monorepos are easy.
To the contrary, the tooling is precisely the hard part.
But the point is that the difficulty of the tooling is a lot less than the difficulty of managing compatibility conflicts between tons of separate repos.
Each esoteric bug in C only needs to be fixed once. Whereas your version compatibility conflict this week is going to be followed by another one next week.
And the tooling to handle this is not even particularly conceptually complicated - a "versionset" is a set of versions - a set of pointers to a particular commit of a repository. When you build and deploy an application, what you're building is a versionset containing the correct versions of all its dependencies. And pull requests can span across multiple repositories.
Working at Amazon had its annoyances, but dependency management across repos was not one of them.
This bit is doing a lot of work here.
How do you make commits atomic? Is there a central commit queue? Do you run the tests of every dependent repo? How do you track cross-repo dependencies to do that? Is there a central database? How do you manage rollbacks?
I assume you meant to write "is" there?
If you really dig down into why we code the way we do, the “best practices” in software development, about half of them are heavily influenced by merge conflict, if not the primary cause.
If I group like functions together in a large file, then I (probably) won’t conflict with another person doing an unrelated ticket that touches the same file. But if we both add new functions at the bottom of the file, we’ll conflict. As long as one of us does the right thing everything is fine.
I've been watching all the recent GitMerge talks put up by GitButler and following the monorepo / scaling developments - lots of great things being put out there by Microsoft, Github, and Gitlab.
I'd like to understand this last 16 char vs full path check issue better. How does this fit in with delta compression, pack indexes, multi-pack indexes etc ... ?
Officer, I'd like to report a murder committed in a side note!
> We work in a very large Javascript monorepo at Microsoft we colloquially call 1JS.
I used to call it office.com.. Teams is the worst offender there. Even a website with a cryptominer on it runs faster than that junk.Collaborative editing between a web app, two mobile anpps and a desktop app with 30 years of backwards compatibility and it pretty much just works. No wonder that took a lot of JavaScript!
We've totally given up any kind of collaborative document editing because it's too frustrating, or we use Notion instead, which for all it's fault, at least the basic stuff like loading a bloody file works...
I've come to realize that Teams should only be used in large companies who can afford dedicated staff to manage it. But it was certainly sold to us as being easy to use and suitable for a small company.
I mentioned that because security software blocking things locally or at the network level is such a common source of friction. I don’t think Teams is perfect by any means but the core functionality has been quite stable in personal use, both of my wife’s schools, and my professional use so I wouldn’t conclude that it’s hopeless and always like that.
I also had to add a new user yesterday, so I went to admin.microsoft.com in Edge. 403 error. Tried Chrome and Firefox. Same. Went back to Edge and suddenly it loaded. The like an idiot I refreshed, 403 error again. Another 5 or six refreshes and it finally loaded again and I was able to add the new user. There's never any real error messages that would help me debug anything, it's just endless frustration and slowness.
I beg to differ. Last time I had to use PowerPoint (granted, that was ~3 years ago), math on the slides broke when you touched it with a client that wasn't of the same type as the one that initially put it there. So you would need to use either the web app or the desktop app to edit it, but you couldn't switch between them. Since we were working on the slides with multiple people you also never knew what you had to use if someone else wrote that part initially.
It really is. With shared documents you just have to give up. If someone edits them on the web, in Teams, in the actual app or some other way like on iOS, it all goes to hell.
Pages get added or removed, images jump about, fonts change and various other horrors occur.
If you care, you’ll get ground into the earth.
I think they didn't deliver much new features in early 2020s because they were busy with a big refactoring from DOM to canvas rendering [0].
To the point where they quickly found the flaws in JS for large codebases and came up with Typescript. I think. It makes sense that TS came out of the office for web project.
Just a note OMR (the office monorepo) is a different (and actually much larger) monorepo than 1JS (which is big on its own)
To be fair I suspect a lot of the bloat in both originates from the amount of home grown tooling.
What is it about Europe that makes it more difficult? That internet in Europe isn't as good? Actually, I have heard that some primary schools in Europe lack internet. My grandson's elementary school in rural California (population <10k) had internet as far back as 1998.
first of all "internet in Europe" makes close to zero sense to argue about. The article just uses it as a shortcut to not start listing countries.
I live in a country where I have 10Gbps full-duplex and I pay 50$ / month, in "Europe".
The issue is that some countries have telecom lobbies which are still milking their copper networks. Then the "competition committees" in most of these countries are actually working AGAINST the benefit of the public, because they don't allow 1 single company to start offering fiber, because that would be a competition advantage. So the whole system is kinda in a deadlock. In order to unblock, at least 2 telecoms have to agree to release fiber deals together. It has happened in some countries.
//Confused swede with 10G fiber all over the place. Writing from literally the countryside next to nowhere.
Then there are villages, which were promised fiber connections, but somehow after switching to the fiber connection made them have unstable Internet and ofter no Internet. Saw some documentary about that, could be fixed by now.
Putting fiber into the ground also requires a whole lot of effort opening up roads and replacing what's there. Those costs they try to push to the consumers with their 800+ Euro extortion scheme.
But to be honest, I am also OK with my current connection. All I worry about is it being stable, no package loss, and no ping spikes. A consistently good connection stability is more important than throughout. Sadly, I cannot buy any of those guarantees from any ISP.
Government will pay the extra fees, which can easily end up close to 10000 EUR due to large distances.
If all you need to pay is 800 EUR, then I don't understand what is your issue? Just pay it.
Deutsche Telekom is the former monopoly that was half-privatized around 1995 or something. The state still owns quite a large stake of it.
They milk their ancient copper crap for everything they can while keeping prices high.
They are refusing useful backbone interconnects to monopolize access to their customers (Actually they are not allowed to refuse. They just offer interconnections only in their data centers in the middle of nowhere, where you need to rent their (outrageously priced) rackspace and fibres because there is nothing else. They are refusing for decades to do anything useful at the big exchanges like DECIX).
And if there should ever be a small competitor that on their own tries to lay fibre somewhere, they quickly lay their own fibre into the open ditches (they are allowed to do that) and offer just enough rebates for their former copper customers to switch to their fibre that the competitor cannot recoup the invest and goes bankrupt. Since that dance is now known to everyone, even the announcement of Telekom laying their own fibres kills the competitors' projects there. So after a competitor's announcement of fibre rollout, Telekom does the same, project dead, no fibre rollout at all.
Oh, and since it is a partially-state-owned former monopoly/ministry, the state and competition authorities turn a blind eye to all that, when not actively promoting them...
Then there is the problem of "5G reception" vs. "5G reception with usable bandwidth". A lot of overbooking goes on, many cells don't have sufficient capacity allocated, so there are reports of 4G actually being faster in many places.
And also, yes, you can get 5G in a lot of actually populated areas. But you certainly will pay through the nose for that, usually you get a low-GB amount of traffic included, so maybe a tenth of the Microsoft monorepo in question. The rest is pay-10Eur-per-GB or something.
This sort of thing has been a problem on every project I've worked on that's involved people in America. (I'm in the UK.) Throughput is inconsistent, latency is inconsistent, and long-running downloads aren't reliable. Perhaps I'm over-simplifying, but I always figured the problem was fairly obvious: it's a lot of miles from America to Europe, west coast America especially, and a lot of them are underwater, and your're sharing the conduit with everybody else in Europe. Many ways for packets to get lost (or get held up long enough to count), and frankly it's quite surprising more of them don't.
(Usual thing for Perforce is to leave it running overnight/weekend with a retry count of 1 million. I'm not sure what you'd do with Git, though? it seems to do the whole transfer as one big non-retryable lump. There must be something though.)
I'm from the Netherlands where over 90% of households now have fiber connections, for example. Here in Berlin it's very hard to get that. They are starting to roll it out in some areas but it's taking very long and each building has to then get connected, which is up to the building owners.
According to the Bundesnetzagentur over 90% [1] of Germany has 5G coverage (and almost all of the rest has 4G [2]).
[1] https://www.bundesnetzagentur.de/SharedDocs/Pressemitteilung...
[2] https://gigabitgrundbuch.bund.de/GIGA/DE/MobilfunkMonitoring...
The "coverage" they are reporting is not by area but by population. So all the villages and fields that the train or autobahn goes by won't have 5G, because they are in the other 10% because of their very low population density.
And the reporting comes out of the mobile phone operators' reports and simulations (they don't have to do actual measurements). Since their license depends on meeting a coverage goal, massive over-reporting is rampant. The biggest provider (Deutsche Telekom) is also partially state-owned, so the regulators don't look as closely...
Edit: accidentially posted this in the wrong comment: Then there is the problem of "5G reception" vs. "5G reception with usable bandwidth". A lot of overbooking goes on, many cells don't have sufficient capacity allocated, so there are reports of 4G actually being faster in many places.
And also, yes, you can get 5G in a lot of actually populated areas. But you certainly will pay through the nose for that, usually you get a low-GB amount of traffic included, so maybe a tenth of the Microsoft monorepo in question. The rest is pay-10Eur-per-GB or something.
I also deal with commercial customers that have companies in areas with either no or poor mobile connectivity and since we sell mobile apps to them, we always need to double check they actually have a good connection. One of our customers is on the edge of a city with very spotty 4G at best. I recently recommended Star Link to another company that is operating in rural areas. They were asking about offline capabilities of our app. Because they deal with poor connectivity all the time. I made the point that you can get internet anywhere you want now for a fairly reasonable price.
Some EU is still suffering from Telekom copper barons.
They lied a lot for a good few years saying "OMG fibre broadband!" When in reality is was still copper for the last mile so that "fibre" connection in reality was some ADSL variant and limited to 80/20mpbs.
Actual full fibre all the way from your home to the internet is I think still quite a way behind. Even in London (London! The capital city with high density) there are places where there are no full fibre options.
[1]: https://www.thinkbroadband.com/news/10343-85-gigabit-coverag...
FWIW every school I've seen (and I recently toured a bunch looking at them for my kids to start at) all had the internet and the kids were using iPads etc for various things.
Anecdotally my secondary school (11-18y in UK) in rural Hertfordshire was online in the 1995 region. It was via I think a 14.4 modem and there actually wasn't that much useful material for kids then to be honest. I remember looking at the "non-professional style" NASA website for instance (the current one is obviously quite fancy in comparison, but it used to be very rustic and at some obscure domain). CD-based encyclopedias we're all the rage instead around that time IIRC - Encarta et al.
* in America, peering between ISPs is great, but the last-mile connection is terrible
* In Europe, the last-mile connection is great, but peering between the ISPs is terrible (ISPs are at war with each other). Often you could massively improve performance by renting a VPS in the correct city and routing your traffic manually.
> I have heard that some primary schools in Europe lack internet.
Maybe they lack internet but teach their pupils how to write "its".
What aspects of Azure DevOps are hell to you?
Hampering the productivity:
- Review messages get sent out before review is actually finished. It should be sent out only once the reviewer has finished the work.
- Code reviews are implemented in a terrible way compared to GitHub or GitLab.
- Re-requesting a review once you did implemented proposed changes? Takes a single click on GitHub, but can not be done in Azure DevOps. I need to e.g. send a Slack message to the reviewer or remove and re-add them as reviewer.
- Knowing to what line of code a reviewer was giving feedback to? Not possible after the PR got updated, because the feedback of the reviewer sticks to the original line number, which might now contain something entirely different.
- Reviewing the commit messages in a PR takes way too many clicks. This causes people to not review the commit messages, letting bad commit messages pass and thus making it harder for future developers trying to figure out why something got implemented the way it did. Examples: - Too many clicks to review a commit message: PR -> Commits -> Commit -> Details
- Comments on a specific commit does not shown in the commits PR
- Unreliable servers. E.g. "remote: TF401035: The object '<snip>' does not exist.\nfatal: the remote end hung up unexpectedly" happens too often on git fetch. Usually works on a 2nd try.- Interprets IPv6 addresses in commit messages as emoji. E.g. fc00::6:100:0:0 becomes fc00::60:0.
- Can not cancel a stage before it actually has started (Wasting time, cycles)
- Terrible diffs (can not give a public example)
- Network issues. E.g. checkouts that should take a few seconds take 15+ minutes (can not give a public example)
- Step "checkout": Changes working folder for following steps (shitty docs, shitty behaviour)
- The documentation reads as if their creators get paid by the number of words, but not for actually being useful. Whereas GitHub for example has actually useful documentation.
- PR are always "Show everything", instead of "Active comments" (what I want). Resets itself on every reload.
- Tabs are hardcoded (?) to be displayed as 4 chars - but we want 8 (Zephyr)
- Re-running a pipeline run (manually) does not retain the resources selected in the last run
Security:
- DevOps does not support modern SSH keys, one has to use RSA keys (https://developercommunity.visualstudio.com/t/support-non-rs...). It took them multiple years to allow RSA keys which are not deprecated by OpenSSH due to security concerns (https://devblogs.microsoft.com/devops/ssh-rsa-deprecation/), yet no support for modern algos. This also rules out the usage of hardware tokens, e.g. YubiKeys.
Azure DevOps is dying. Thus, things will not get better:
- New, useful features get implemented by Microsoft for GitHub, but not for DevOps. E.g. https://devblogs.microsoft.com/devops/static-web-app-pr-work...
- "Nearly everyone who works on AzDevOps today became a GitHub employee last year or was hired directly by GitHub since then." (Reddit, https://www.reddit.com/r/azuredevops/comments/nvyuvp/comment...)
- Looking at Azure DevOps Released Features (https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/devops/release-notes...) it is quite obvious how much things have slowed down since e.g. 2019.
Lastly - their support is ridiculously bad.
Even the hounds of hell may benefit from dogfooding.
Unrecognized 100x programmer somewhere lol
Much much smaller of course though. A raspberry pi had died and I was trying to recover some projects that had not been pushed to GitHub for a while.
Holy crap. A few small JavaScript projects with perhaps 20 or 30 code files, a few thousand lines of code for a couple of 10s of KBs of actual code at most had 10s of gigabytes of data in the .git/ folder. Insane.
In the end I killed the recovery of the entire home dir and had to manually select folders to avoid accidentally trying to recover a .git/ dir as it was taking forever on a poorly SD card that was already in a bad way and I did not want to finally kill it for good by trying to salvage countless gigabytes of trash for git.
- When you have multiple files in the repo which have the same trailing 16 characters in the repo path, git may wrongly calculate deltas, mixing up between those files. In here they had multiple CHANGELOG.md files mixed up.
- So if those files are big and change often, you end up with massive deltas and inflated repo size.
- There's a new git option (in Microsoft git fork for now) and config to use full file path to calculate those deltas, which fixes the issue when pushing, and locally repacking the repo.
```
git repack -adf --path-walk
git config --global pack.usePathWalk true
```
- According to a screenshot, Chromium repacked in this way shrinks from 100GB to 22GB.
- However AFAIU until GitHub enables it by default, GitHub clones from such repos will still be inflated.
Also, thank you for the TLDR!
Fixing an existing repository requires a full repack, and for a repository as big as Chromium it still takes more than half a day (56000 seconds is 15h30), even if that's an improvement over the previous 3 days it's a lot of compute.
From my experience of previous attempts, trying to get Github to run a full repack with harsh settings is extremely difficult (possibly because their infrastructure relies on more loosely packed repositories), I tried to get that for $dayjob's primary repository whose initial checkout had gotten pretty large and got nowhere.
As of right now, said repository is ~9.5GB on disk on initial clone (full, not partial, excluding working copy). Locally running `repack -adf --window 250` brings it down to ~1.5GB, at the cost of a few hours of CPU.
The repository does have some of the attributes described in TFA, so I'm definitely looking forward to trying these changes out.
For now we’re getting by with partial clones, and employee machines being imaged with a decently up to date repository.
Wait, what? Has MS forked git?
These are not forks-going-their-own-way forks.
This surely cannot be correct. Even the title of the linked article doesn't use "shranked". What?