couchand

21 ms·

1. 301.▲
   by couchand 4y ago

   Thank you for addressing my one and only concern with this scheme! No notes.
2. 302.▲
   by couchand 4y ago

   What's weird about most of these discussions is how they're always seen as technical considerations distinct from the individuals who actually use the system. The kernel needs a highly-distributed workflow because it's a huge
3. 303.▲
   by couchand 4y ago

   I'm not sure if you misread my comment, but my point was that it's far too easy to accidentally introduce bugs in merge commits that go unnoticed for a long time. I've never seen a rebase gone awry introduce production bugs,
4. 304.▲
   by couchand 4y ago

   Fair point, and I would not advocate that specific workflow! My point was just to illustrate that we can live without merge.
5. 305.▲
   by couchand 4y ago

   way easier to tell that you've messed up a rebase
6. 306.▲
   by couchand 4y ago

   > Rebasing isn't an alternative to this, it's just a different way of manually keeping in sync. I never said it was, I said it was the right way to keep them in sync. > Why? You've given no justification for your prefer
7. 307.▲
   by couchand 4y ago

   Totally on board (except the forbidden -a switch). The last command is: cp .git/refs/heads/feature .git/refs/heads/main No merge needed.
8. 308.▲
   by couchand 4y ago

   recursion
9. 309.▲
   by couchand 4y ago

   > arguably I shouldn't have all these long-lived branches in the first place This is the problem here. If you have multiple long-lived branches, there's no technical solution to preventing rot -- you must actively keep them in
10. 310.▲
    by couchand 4y ago

    Then you don't actually need merge? Am I missing something? If you always rebase the branch, the commits can be applied directly.
11. 311.▲
    by couchand 4y ago

    1. True, the only information I have about your perspective is what you've shared here. 2. I'm not sure to what you're referring? When a manager comes on here and says "these workers think they're important but they
12. 312.▲
    by couchand 4y ago

    Yes. Your team members care about what they do, and think it's important. You don't think it's important and you view them as replaceable. Your intent is quite clear.
13. 313.▲
    by couchand 4y ago

    It sure sounds like very little respect for the people you work with that you so trivialize their goals.
14. 314.▲
    by couchand 4y ago

    I have my old team's rubber chicken and I'm never giving it up. In-person code review is the only way to do it. Pull requests optimize for the wrong part of code review, so now everyone thinks it's supposed to be a quality g
15. 315.▲
    by couchand 4y ago

    If you think the people you work with don't have a sincere desire to accomplish things you are a terrible manager.
16. 316.▲
    by couchand 4y ago

    Note that the second part of the argument was that the quantities needed are low. I'd go even further than the GP: even in the "old days" my understanding is that the number of precision parts needed was very low. Most circ
17. 317.▲
    by couchand 4y ago

    The same way we did in 1995?
18. 318.▲
    by couchand 4y ago

    Ok, I'll amend my statement to read: "if viewing a list of basic links that match a few basic filters requires client-side JS you're doing it wrong" and I stand by it. If you'd like to employ JS to progressively-enh
19. 319.▲
    by couchand 4y ago

    I apologize if my replies seem weird. I'm genuinely confused because I've seen you be such a thoughtful and empathetic internet person. I'm not asking you to fix it for them (That'd be crazy!) But if you're going to
20. 320.▲
    by couchand 4y ago

    I meant your original post. You went out of your way to either gaslight or mock others who were sharing their troubles. Why? Edit: I see you've edited your comment to answer my question. Well, all I can say is that's an interesti
21. 321.▲
    by couchand 4y ago

    Why even bother commenting, Thomas?
22. 322.▲
    by couchand 4y ago

    Could you kindly help out the other users here who all have described the archiving being broken for years?
23. 323.▲
    by couchand 4y ago

    If viewing a list of basic links requires client-side JS you're doing it wrong.
24. 324.▲
    by couchand 4y ago

    You can't "turn off" memory safety in Rust, that's an absolutely misleading way to describe unsafe.
25. 325.▲
    by couchand 4y ago

    It seems to be Pascal, originally. > Je n’ai fait celle-ci plus longue que parce que je n’ai pas eu le loisir de la faire plus courte. https://quoteinvestigator.com/2012/04/28/shorter-letter/
26. 326.▲
    by couchand 4y ago

    What's really amazing, though, is that the marketing value of this flexibility to corporate managers exceeds the innate financials of the arrangement! As with so many budgetary decisions, companies would rather waste money pretending
27. 327.▲
    by couchand 4y ago

    And of course, there is no free lunch. You run smack into the expression problem here. The question is: do you have more places that check your conditions than types of options? Are you more likely to add a new check (and need to verify ex
28. 328.▲
    by couchand 4y ago

    Even (or perhaps especially) with a machine per user, it's critical to keep that user from accidentally shooting themselves in the foot. Typing sudo does help remind a user they're doing something different. I don't want to a
29. 329.▲
    by couchand 4y ago

    Trusted by whom?
30. 330.▲
    by couchand 4y ago

    Well it's only the beginning and slow relative to what comes after. Relative to what came before, it's much later and faster!