Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

15 years later, Microsoft morged my diagram

nvie.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

361–370 of 427 posts

Re: 15 years later, Microsoft morged my diagram

#361

Post by arduanika »

dxdm wrote: post #352
p_ing wrote: post #299

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What? This is how it works. There are too many people here like the op that make assumptions on what the process is/should be.

My dog does this thing where she picks a stick and gets you to pull on it, and she will pull on her end, too. She gets very focused on it. Pulling on the stick is the most important thing to her in that moment, when in fact it's just a stick she chose to turn into this tug of war. That's not entirely unlike what you're doing here. You latched onto a misunderstanding of OP's intent, and by making a thing out of it got…

This is a perfect description. I've probably been the dog at some point.

p_ing, see my nearby comment about what we mean by "multiple". Does that comment make any false "assumptions"? Or, is it you who are mistaken, persistently failing to understand what your interlocutors are saying?

Re: 15 years later, Microsoft morged my diagram

#362

Post by InvisibleUp »

nxobject wrote: post #50
anonymous908213 wrote: post #32

Microsoft employee (VP of something or other, for whatever Microsoft uses "VP" to mean) doing damage control on Bluesky: https://bsky.app/profile/scott.hanselman.com/post/3mez4yxty2... > looks like a vendor, and we have a group now doing a post-mortem trying to figure out how it happened. It'll be removed ASAFP > Understood. Not trying to sweep under rugs, but I also want to point out that everything is moving very f…

A postmortem for that but not Copilot in notepad.exe? Priorities…

I’d also love a post-mortem on their guide to pirating the entire Harry Potter series for AI use. (https://devblogs.microsoft.com/azure-sql/langchain-with-sqlv...)

I’ve lost trust in anything Microsoft publishes anymore.

Re: 15 years later, Microsoft morged my diagram

#363

Post by b00ty4breakfast »

we're being served the fecal sculptures that have been reconstituted from our own sewerage, culture as we know it is basically at the end of it's life. Everything must be mechanized, human involvement, and thus human agency, at any step is seen as abhorrent in the industrial milieu.

Re: 15 years later, Microsoft morged my diagram

#364

Post by HelloNurse »

tremon wrote: post #280
HelloNurse wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "everything is moving very fast" Then slow down. With this objective lack or control, sooner or later your LLM experiments in production will drive into a wall instead of hitting a little pothole like this diagram.

"Driving into a wall" is still a positive outcome. It's just as likely to drive into a crowd.

Serious loss of life is a plausible LLM outcome, particularly for Microsoft who does both operating systems (incidents can be much worse than the Crowdstrike bricking) and chatbot assistants that can offer lethal advice. Catastrophic property damage is hopefully more likely.

Re: 15 years later, Microsoft morged my diagram

#365

Post by dxdm »

arduanika wrote: post #361
dxdm wrote: post #352

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My dog does this thing where she picks a stick and gets you to pull on it, and she will pull on her end, too. She gets very focused on it. Pulling on the stick is the most important thing to her in that moment, when in fact it's just a stick she chose to turn into this tug of war. That's not entirely unlike what you're doing here. You latched onto a misunderstanding of OP's intent, and by making a thing out of it got…

This is a perfect description. I've probably been the dog at some point. p_ing, see my nearby comment about what we mean by "multiple". Does that comment make any false "assumptions"? Or, is it you who are mistaken, persistently failing to understand what your interlocutors are saying?

It can be hard to resist.

Re: 15 years later, Microsoft morged my diagram

#366

Post by [deleted] »

16bytes wrote: post #356
flurdy wrote: post #214

Earlier quoted context omitted.

LOL, calling Scott Hanselman a 'VP of something' is funny. Been listening to his stuff for years, even when I despised MS. Always seems genuinely nice. Probably one of the main reasons I these days have a more positive image of Microsoft.

I thought the same thing. Scott is basically CEO of devrel at Microsoft. Maybe we're of a different age to remember when Scott was super influential as a blogger / conference speaker, but even now he's not some random VP.

[deleted]

Re: 15 years later, Microsoft morged my diagram

#367

Post by filleduchaos »

jimmaswell wrote: post #322
arduanika wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Decades upon decades of hard work by public contributors -- open source code, careful tech blogging, painstaking diagrams -- all of it will be assimilated without credit or accuracy into the morg. Resistance is futile.

Good - we've been building the seed corpus for AI the past 50 years, and all this manual work now becomes exponentially more useful to others who get to build amazing things without all the tedium. I'm personally thrilled if my code made it in to the machine to help others. We laid train tracks by hand so that they could invent a machine to do it and we can focus on the destination. I've been coding for over a decade…

IMO this would be a much more sensible reply to a different post, not one about a chart that unironically contains the words "continvoucly morged"

Re: 15 years later, Microsoft morged my diagram

#368

Post by plorkyeran »

QuercusMax wrote: post #310
disruptiveink wrote: post #218

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Correct. If you can always either fix it forwards or roll back, which you should be able to unless you're building software that needs to go out in releases with versions tracked separately that need to keep getting fixes, trunk-based development simplifies everyone's lives greatly. I've never seen an organisation that insists on release branches and complicated git merge flows to release their web-based software gai…

I've done branchy development to good effect for user-installable software, where we committed to maintain e.g. 3.2.x for a certain time period, so we had to keep release branches around for a long while. But for continuously deployed SaaS or webapps, there's no point.

I've worked on software where we had multiple maintained release branches and we always just worked off master and then cut long-lived release branches from master at some point. Once a branch was cut we'd never merge master into it again and instead backport just specific fixes, which is quite different from git-flow.

Re: 15 years later, Microsoft morged my diagram

#369

Post by secretazianman8 »

choeger wrote: post #144
m12k wrote: post #137

Regarding the original git-flow model: I've never had anyone able to explain to me why it's worth the hassle to do all the integration work on the "develop" branch, while relegating the master/main branch to just being a place to park the tag from the latest release. Why not just use the master/main branch for integration instead of the develop branch - like the git gods intended - and then not have the develop branc…

I am working with main/master for years now, and there's one problem you don't have with develop: Whenever you merge something into master, it kind of blocks the next release until its (non-continuous) QA is done. If your changes are somewhat independent, you can cherry-pick them from develop into master in an arbitrary order and call that a release whenever you want to.

Are you using feature flags in your workflow pattern? These can be used to gate releases into your production environment while still allowing development work to be continuously integrated to trunk without blocking.

This also means that the release to prod happens post-integration by means of turning the feature flag on. Which is arguably a higher quality code review than pre-integration.

Re: 15 years later, Microsoft morged my diagram

#370

Post by QuercusMax »

dcrazy wrote: post #360
QuercusMax wrote: post #310

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've done branchy development to good effect for user-installable software, where we committed to maintain e.g. 3.2.x for a certain time period, so we had to keep release branches around for a long while. But for continuously deployed SaaS or webapps, there's no point.

Until you have a customer that must stay on v.previous for extra time for some reason.

Well in that case it sounds like you're shipping multiple versioned instances of your software for different clients, which is much closer to shrink-wrapped software than it is to e.g. gmail.
Post reply on HN