More in depth look at the launch white paper and the issues covered in the PR. Not much survives scrutiny... there's nothing special with this model.
A reminder that path based APIs and security don't go well together to manage files.
Interesting piece which gives some perspective on the path which led to async/await. It seems to omit some pieces of the history to me but that's a minor issue. I like how it points that it indeed led to gradual improvements locally for developers writing their functions, but is overall leading to larger issues in the involved ecosystems.
A single CLI tool for any Git forge? This sounds appealing.
Indeed, and it's going to get even crazier at some point. I guess somewhat soon but who knows...
Architecture work is not only technical, you need processes to put the architecture of a project in place. That said, you can make things easier with standards to smooth the path toward the preferred types of architectures in your organisation.
Nice quality of life improvements for the history rewrites. That said, I'm particularly looking forward to the changes in hooks handling, it's always been a pain to deal with in teams, moving them to config should help.
People are manipulating vanity metrics to attract VC money? Who would have expected? This is so unsurprising, I don't even understand why people look at those...
Clearly, any endeavour which has to scale will need some form of bureaucracy to stay afloat. The art is keeping it to a minimal before it starts to be an end in itself.
OK, I find it funny. That said, there's a kernel of truth in this piece: there's clearly a taxonomy of bugs and you better know on what you just stepped.
Indeed, architecture work is not only technical (what is really?). You definitely need to account for the organisation and the process to actually put the architecture in place. It's not just about having pretty pictures.
Pausing a game is not as simple as it sounds. There are many approaches to it.
Finer grained borrowing is still something people need in Rust. Here is a potential solution to get them today.
One of the dark sides of our industry, and this is is accelerating at a worrying pace. Maybe it's time to look at and fix the whole hardware life cycle?
When possible it's nice to nest your error types, this allows better investigation when something fails.
Looks like a small syntax adjustment, but that indeed open the door to nice improvements.
The FSF is now weighting in on the Euro-Office vs OnlyOffice situation. You have to respect the spirit of the AGPL and can't take away freedom with extra clauses. Seems to make sense to me.
This looks like an interesting agreement. E2EE messaging anyone? There is more of course, but I'm especially excited regarding this one.
Probably not... This is really taking a long time to be adopted. It's not an incremental thing at all, this doesn't help.
Are we surprised it's mostly a PR stunt? Not at all. Of course, I agree a lot with the conclusion: we can't trust any claim from those companies. They try to present themselves as labs but mostly try to disguise marketing as research...