81–90 of 152 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The internet is not centralized. It is literally the largest decentralized network in existence. A network of networks with no central hub.
Oh so you haven't heard of Cloudflare?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I know this a greybeard's fantasy and that most people working today were trained not to bother, but: important things should not have GitHub as a failure point . Hobby projects and today's work? Sure. Point straight at GitHub and hack away. And when it goes down, get yourself a coffee. But everything that's anywhere near production should have already pointed those github requests to a mirror or other tool in your o…
It's not that black and white. Where do you draw the line on what can and can't be a failure point? My cloud provider is probably an acceptable point. If every AWS region goes down I'm not going to have a spare cloud provider. What about an auth provider? Do I need a backup there? What about CI, do I need multiple CI systems? 3rd party search services, realtime messaging services, the list goes on. For 1% of systems,…
I need a macro template for those memes with Bart Simpson on the blackboard and make it say "I will always have a backup plan for third-party services". Seriously people: gitea exists. Gitlab self-hosted exists. Drone/Woodpecker CI exists. It's not that difficult to set up a project that does not depend on Github. I spent less time setting these up than the amount of down time that Github has had this year.
Problem is, this is one of 50 things that can go wrong for which you should have a robust backup plan for
we couldn't onboard a new hire because they couldn't even run a curl command for some basic tooling
I thought it was a url, but the url actually loads a bash script that tries to pull from their github repo
I cannot wait for Gitea, Forgejo, and GitLab to start federating with each other via ActivityPub. Then we can all take one more step away from a corporate-controlled internet.
- 'one more step away from a corporate-controlled internet" Downvote me to grey-world if you like, but I think everyone's crazy to put all their code infrastructure in the hands of fucking Microsoft . Especially literal free open-source software. Who do you think Microsoft is? What do you know of Microsoft's history and their core values (they're "embrace, extinguish & exsanguinate"). It's like giving fucking Sauron…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The "nothing to see here" approach to access control has a lot of weird culture-consequences. I wish software would just address me like the peasant that I am, rather than trying to gaslight me into believing that my artificially limited world is the whole one.
I think you don't want to reveal the presence of projects by name or not -- just the name of repo could be sensitive info, potentially.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The "nothing to see here" approach to access control has a lot of weird culture-consequences. I wish software would just address me like the peasant that I am, rather than trying to gaslight me into believing that my artificially limited world is the whole one.
I think you don't want to reveal the presence of projects by name or not -- just the name of repo could be sensitive info, potentially.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It’s crazy that there is no common CI spec. Every single platform is completely different. Last time I tried Act it had some pretty severe limitations. Perhaps I should take it for another spin.
The common CI spec is sh & make, but everybody hates those I guess. Git hook management's really awkward. Even with tools to synchronize them (... all of them? You may want some that are just for your own use) it's a pain. "I want these hooks to run, in order, but only when a merge commit happens on a machine with such-and-such designation, and I want it to run the task on a different machine, but we need to make sur…
Are we talking GNU Make, nmake, BSD Make? (Isn't this why autotools exist in the first place -- to make something allegedly cross-platform for different flavors of Make)?
I get bitten repeatedly by sh being a symlink to different Shells, even though I've been using it for many years. The most recent piece of insanity being "cd foo bar" resulting in an error, but changing to foo directory while in some other version simply resulting in an error.
Also, error reporting. It's way too broken to consider sh a reliable tool. I wish things could be done with very simple tools and all this complexity around them was unnecessary. Unfortunately, here, this complexity while isn't unavoidable is indeed warranted due to abysmal quality of the simple tools.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's not that black and white. Where do you draw the line on what can and can't be a failure point? My cloud provider is probably an acceptable point. If every AWS region goes down I'm not going to have a spare cloud provider. What about an auth provider? Do I need a backup there? What about CI, do I need multiple CI systems? 3rd party search services, realtime messaging services, the list goes on. For 1% of systems,…
I draw that line at around 99.9% availability.