“Announcment”

It used to be quite common on mailing lists to categorise/tag threads by using subject prefixes such as “ANN”, “HELP”, “BUG” and “RESOLVED”.

It’s just an old habit but I feel my messages/posts lack some clarity if I don’t do it 😅

I’m not an 1.e4 or Sicilian player but this smells like wild tactical variations early in the game.

I didn’t like the capitalised names so configured xdg to use all lowercase letters. That’s why ~/opt fits in pretty nicely.

You’ve got a point re ~/.local/opt but I personally like the idea of having the important bits right in my home dir. Here’s my layout (which I’m quite used to now after all these years):

$ ls ~
bin  
desktop  
doc  
downloads  
mnt  
music  
opt 
pictures  
public  
src  
templates  
tmp  
videos  
workspace

where

• bin is just a bunch of symlinks to frequently used apps from opt
• src is where i keep clones of repos (but I don’t do work in src)
• workspace is a where I do my work on git worktrees (based off src)

Thanks! So much for my reading skills/attention span 😂

Which Debian version is it based on?

RE Go: Others have already mentioned the right way, thought I’d personally prefer ~/opt/go over what was suggested.

RE Perl: To instruct Perl to install to another directory, for example to ~/opt/perl5, put the following lines somewhere in your bash init files.

export PERL5LIB="$HOME/opt/perl5/lib/perl5${PERL5LIB:+:${PERL5LIB}}"
export PERL_LOCAL_LIB_ROOT="$HOME/opt/perl5${PERL_LOCAL_LIB_ROOT:+:${PERL_LOCAL_LIB_ROOT}}"
export PERL_MB_OPT="--install_base \"$HOME/opt/perl5\""
export PERL_MM_OPT="INSTALL_BASE=$HOME/opt/perl5"
export PATH="$HOME/opt/perl5/bin${PATH:+:${PATH}}"

Though you need to re-install the Perl packages you had previously installed.

First off, I was ready to close the tab at the slightest suggestion of using Velocity as a metric. That didn’t happen 🙂

I like the idea that metrics should be contained and sustainable. Though I don’t agree w/ the suggested metrics.

In general, it seems they are all designed around the process and not the product. In particular, there’s no mention of the “value unlocked” in each sprint: it’s an important one for an Agile team as it holds Product accountable to understanding of what is the $$$ value of the team’s effort.

The suggested set, to my mind, is formed around the idea of a feature factory line and its efficiency (assuming it is measurable.) It leaves out the “meaning” of what the team achieve w/ that efficiency.

My 2 cents.

Good read nonetheless 👍 Got me thinking about this intriguing topic after a few years.

This is fantastic! 👏

I use Perl one-liners for record and text processing a lot and this will be definitely something I will keep coming back to - I’ve already learned a trick from “Context Matching” (9) 🙂

That sounds a great starting point!

🗣Thinking out loud here…

Say, if a crate implements the AutomatedContentFlagger interface it would show up on the admin page as an “Automated Filter” and the admin could dis/enable it on demand. That way we can have more filters than CSAM using the same interface.

That was my case until I discovered that GNU tar has got a pretty decent online manual - it’s way better written than the manpage. I rarely forget the options nowadays even though I dont’ use tar that frequently.

This is quite intriguing. But DHH has left so many details out (at least in that post) as pointed out by @breadsmasher@lemmy.world - it makes it difficult to relate to.

On the other hand, like DHH said, one’s mileage may vary: it’s, in many ways, a case-by-case analysis that companies should do.

I know many businesses shrink the OPs team and hire less experienced OPs people to save $$$. But just to forward those saved $$$ to cloud providers. I can only assume DDH’s team is comprised of a bunch of experienced well-payed OPs people who can pull such feats off.

Nonetheless, looking forward to, hopefully, a follow up post that lays out some more details. Pray share if you come across it 🙏

TBH I use whatever build tool is the better fit for the job, be it Gradle, SBT or Rebar.

But for some (presumably subjective) reason, I like GNU Make quite a lot. And whenever I get the chance I use it - esp since it’s somehow ubiquitous nowadays w/ all the Linux containers/VMs everywhere and Homebrew on Mac machines.

Love the attitude 💪 Let me know if you need help in your quest.

I see.

So what do you think would help w/ this particular challenge? What kinds of tools/facilities would help counter that?

Off the top of my head, do you think

• The sign up process should be more rigorous?
• The first couple of posts/comments by new users should be verified by the mods?
• Mods should be notified of posts/comments w/ poor score?

cc @PrettyFlyForAFatGuy@lemmy.ml

Interesting topic - I’ve seen it surface up a few times recently.

I’ve never been a mod anywhere so I can’t accurately think what workflows/tools a mod needs to be satisfied w/ their, well, mod’ing.

For the sake of my education at least, can you elaborate what do you consider decent moderation tools/workflows? What gaps do you see between that and Lemmy?

PS: I genuinely want to understand this topic better but your post doesn’t provide any details. 😅

A bit too long for my brain but nonetheless it written in plain English, conveys the message very clearly and is definitely a very good read. Thanks for sharing.

That single line of Lisp is probably (defmacro generate-compiler (...) ...) which GCC folks call every time they decide to implement a new compiler 😆

When i read the title, my immediate thought was “Mojolicious project renamed? To a name w/ an emoji!?” 😂

We plan to open-source Mojo progressively over time

Yea, right! I can’t believe that there are people who prefer to work on/with a closed source programming language in 2023 (as if it’s the 80’s.)

… can move faster than a community effort, so we will continue to incubate it within Modular until it’s more complete.

Apparently it was “complete” enough to ask the same “community” for feedback.

I genuinely wonder how they managed to convince enthusiasts to give them free feedback/testing (on github/discord) for something they didn’t have access to the source code.

PS: I didn’t downvote. I simply got upset to see this happening in 2023.

OK, I think I see your point more clearly now. I suppose that’s what many others do (apparently I don’t represent the norm ever 😂.)

So tags can be useful for not only listening but also discovery.

I guess my concern RE tag & community competing. But I’ve got no prior experience designing a social/community based application to be confident to take my case to the RFC.

Hopefully time will prove me wrong.