broeng

7 ms·

31.
by broeng 3y ago
We'll find a way to use up what they can provide :-) With 64GB ram and our infrastructure defined with NixOS, I find myself building and spinning it up locally (in test mode) as part of working on it. Having ~10 VMs running locally wit
32.
by broeng 3y ago
Almost sounds like a productivity enhancement.
33.
by broeng 3y ago
And then we fear it's a dead project, and move on in search for something else with active contributors.
34.
by broeng 3y ago
We must not allow a mineshaft^Wmoonbase gap!
35.
by broeng 4y ago
I think two aspects have played a significant part in the migration pain: 1. The amount of breaking changes. If it was possible to do a little at a time, over a series of releases, it's a bit more manageable. 2. Being an interpreted la
36.
by broeng 4y ago
With that kind of wiggle room, it usually ends up being "We'll disagree when it becomes relevant".
37.
by broeng 4y ago
It definitely can, and it also sometimes happens to us. But we try to reduce the chance this happens quite a bit, by avoiding letting files grow too big, for example. Other things we do, is use codeformatting with rules that reduce the chan
38.
by broeng 4y ago
I do a lot of micro-commits as well, though I rarely find that other members of my team are doing the same, to the same files, at the same time. When that happens, we look into if it's possible to do more frequent merges (fast-forward
39.
by broeng 4y ago
Oh, I have. :-) I'm not saying these situations are impossible. But you can work towards reducing when they arise. If everyone needs to change the same file, then it sounds like something should be refactored (it's probably a quit
40.
by broeng 4y ago
In your example, you pretty much have to change the same line, or neighbouring line, those 10 times to end in that scenario. If it's just somewhere else in the file, git auto-merging will handle it just fine. It seems like a very contr
41.
by broeng 4y ago
That could definitely work. And I considered it a bit but didn't feel confident that the problem would be limited to the namespace, so it felt like the wrong tool for the job at the time. :-) Thank you for the suggestion though. It&#x2
42.
by broeng 4y ago
My memory didn't quite serve me right, so it's not exactly as I described, and I can see, that as you say, providing the namespace to the template command does work. The problem for me is, that setting the namespace in that way wi
43.
by broeng 4y ago
I'd prefer to deploy full manifests as well, but it's not my impression that you can entirely obtain those though "helm template". Certain variables, like "Release.namespace" are only available when actually be
44.
by broeng 4y ago
Just to add a bit to this, as far as I understand, they didn't want the Max to be certified as something other than a normal 737, not because of certifying the aircraft, but because it would also mean all pilots would need additional
45.
by broeng 4y ago
I'm not sure what context Google provides in those text messages, but if it is just a one-time code; how would I know, you aren't trying to log into one of my accounts?
46.
by broeng 4y ago
"I don't know"
47.
by broeng 5y ago
A Google Chat service? Which one?
48.
by broeng 5y ago
But back then, you were rarely paying for the software directly, you were paying for hardware.
49.
by broeng 5y ago
"You can check-out any time you like, But you can never leave!" - Eagles ;-)
50.
by broeng 6y ago
-2 and 2 can be disabled, which I guess is the case on the screenshot you saw.
51.
by broeng 6y ago
Yes, it will be interesting to follow the SCC's (Standard Contractual Clauses). But, even though they were upheld, it is still up to the data exporter to guerantee before every transfer, that the SCC will provide an "essentially
52.
by broeng 6y ago
I only casually follow puppet, but is it a surprise after their streak of CVEs? Some have been pretty damning in my view. Again, only casual observer, so my impression may be overly negative.