I sometimes do things (cleanup, refacs) off-ticket / not part of the ticket. It can be a light alternative when other stuff is complicated and demotivating. Depending on your environment and team/contract setup, simply doing it could be more difficult though.
If it serves your satisfaction and productivity, and is good for the product, then it’s not wasted. Not everything has to be - or even can be - preplanned.
Or Modified Viable/Valuable Product
I don’t have experience with that in particular. I’ll share my more general, tangential thoughts.
MVP is minimal. Extending the scope like that makes me very skeptical (towards scoping and the processes).
Everything you are concerned with would be important topics for retrospectives, or even meetings with management. But of course those don’t exist or are open in all environments. In my team I could openly raise such concerns.
If you’re always rushing to a deadline, or feel like that, think of what you can do and influence to improve that. Retrospectives? Team disuscussions? Partly tuning out of management given focus and doing what you deem important and right? Look for a different team or employer?
Remember, when we do that, we are getting a binary file. But in my imaginary example, we are getting a ‘video description’ in form of PostScript.
The example is a reference/link with handling instructions.
When I think of video metadata, we already have and use formats for that, in a more general and versatile manner.
Maybe I’m missing the point, but sending instructions is a very different and restricted approach.
I like that we describe data and how it shall render. That way, the data is accessible for various interpretations and uses.
Where’s the source?
The post link is to the general website, with no indication.
The linked dotnet.social account describes itself with
Bot parrot for https://devblogs.microsoft.com/
If you like to bring #Microsoft #DevBlogs officially to the #Fediverse,
So I have to take away that it’s not federated after all. There’s only a bot sharing links.
Federated would mean more than a bot, right?
The title question is very broad, varied, and difficult. It depends.
For anything that is not a small script or small, obvious and obviously scoped takes, you can’t assess at first glance.
So for a project/task/extension like you wrote it’s a matter of:
Is there docs or guide specifically for what I want to do/add? If yes, the expectation is it is viable and reasonably doable with low risk.
If there is no guide the assessment is already an exploration and analysis. How is the project structured, is there docs for it or my concerns, where do I expect it as to go and what does it have to touch, what’s the risks of issues and unknown difficulties and efforts. The next step would already be prototyping, and then implementing. Both of which can be started with a “let’s see” and timebox approach where you remain mindful of when known or invested effort or risk increases and you can stop or rethink.
Regarding visual client: I’ve been using TortoiseGit since early on and no other client I’ve tried came close.
I use the log view and have an overview, and an entry point to all common operations I need. Other tools often fail on good overview, blaming through earlier revisions, filterable views of commits or files, or interactive rebase.
I’ve never found pressing modifier keys to be an issue. I’ll be mindful of my use today.
I guess the hold to repeat input (of letters) is not used much, so not a significant or noticeable loss when replaced. I’d certainly see false positives and having to type slower as deal breakers.
If you’re looking for collaboration or audience I’d stay with github. It’s too prevalent to skip for alternative niche with account signup and that elsewhere as a barrier.
If that’s no concern to you it’s viable.
I’ve had a few cases where something made me remember something I experienced and I couldn’t immediately tell whether I was remembering something from a dream or reality.
If you go down that reasoning road then everything is a dream. You are never not dreaming.
…in a very localized and narrow market.
It’s not that simple of an answer. If you want to label the past working fine as such you also have to accept and include the living standards and social-economic environment. Because our environment and world and how we live today are vastly different from back then.
How would you barter-trade production parts of a car, the building of a car, and then that car? How would you barter-trade research and technology development?
Without money, do you pay in a narrow, restrictive way like a place to live and food? Or do you pay in something that can be traded like money - where you practically replaced currency money with a different form of currency money?
One
You copied that function without understanding why it does what it does, and as a result your code IS GARBAGE.
AGAIN.
[…]
Debate continued for some time, in a cooler tone, with Torvalds offering suggestions on what he felt would be a better approach to the issues Rostedt hoped to address.
Harsh tone (in only two instances?), but he still invested in offering suggestions 🤷
I expected more behind the verb “flaming”.
Alternatives
Not every user is weaponization.
Lemmy save, and browser bookmarks
If you - rather than the instance as a whole, and for other reasons - are the target of defederation circumventing that would be sockpuppeting.
If your instance was defederated for reasons unrelated to your behavior and content, then no - you’re simply creating an account on their instance.
I can’t get what it describes through all the Jedi stuff and jokes.
One mentor and one apprentice? And everything else remains unspecified and open?
For FOSS, as it is described, it makes me think it’s a big investment with unclear risk (will they even stay as a contributor?). Which of course can be contextualized - but then what is left here?