4 ms·
It'd be useful to have a way to tell visitors this project still works without having to push commits to refresh the last updates timestamp.
by nonoesp 5y ago
It'd be useful to have a way to tell visitors this project still works without having to push commits to refresh the last updates timestamp.
- Buttons840 5y agoI do this in the README. Include a "state of the project" section. Seeing no updates in 3 months is one thing. Seeing no updates on a project that describes itself as a work in progress is another thing.
- nly 5y agoIsn't this why we have CI/CD and scheduled pipelines?
- TeMPOraL 5y agoSeems like a waste if it's just doing the same work all over again just to update a timestamp. A waste that someone has to pay for.
- OneWingedShark 5y agoYou are right; it's because the "modern" CI/CD is ill-designed, thanks in part to being "generalized" to handle text and "generalized" tools like C compilers and makefiles... instead of, you know, working in the actual problem-space. See this: http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.26.2533&rep=rep1&type=pdf http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.26....
- OneWingedShark 5y ago> Isn't this why we have CI/CD and scheduled pipelines? I mean, kind-of. One of the problems with CI/CD though is that they're poorly designed for the job they do; see this: http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.26.2533&rep=rep1&type=pdf http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.26.... The TL;DR here is that by structuring your code and storing it in a database structured hierarchically you can solve CI/CD in a MUCH nicer manner: your root node's history becoming a history of the project in a compilable state.