Husband, father, kabab lover, history buff, chess fan and software engineer. Believes creating software must resemble art: intuitive creation and joyful discovery.

🌎 linktr.ee/bahmanm

Views are my own.

  • 24 Posts
  • 83 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 26th, 2023

help-circle
  • Good question!

    IMO a good way to help a FOSS maintainer is to actually use the software (esp pre-release) and report bugs instead of working around them. Besides helping the project quality, I’d find it very heart-warming to receive feedback from users; it means people out there are actually not only using the software but care enough for it to take their time, report bugs and test patches.


  • 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)




  • 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 quite intriguing. But DHH has left so many details out (at least in that post) as pointed out by @[email protected] - 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 🙏










  • bahmanm@lemmy.mltoProgramming@programming.devMojo🔥 - It’s finally here!
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    43
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    10 months ago

    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.






  • I work primarily on the JVM & the projects (personal/corporate) I work w/ can be summarised as below:

    1. Building & running the repo is done on the host using an SCM (software configuration management tool) such as Gradle or SBT.
    2. The external dependencies of the repo, such as Redis, are managed via adocker-compose.yml.
    3. The README contains a short series of commands to do different tasks RE (1)

    However one approach that I’ve always been fond of (& apply/advocate wherever I can) is to replace (3) w/ a Makefile containing a bunch of standard targets shared across all repos, eg test, integration-test. Then Makefiles are thinly customised to fit the repo’s particular repo.

    This has proven to be very helpful wrt congnitive load (and also CI/CD pipelines): ALL projects, regardless of the toolchain, use the same set of commands, namely

    • make test
    • make integration-test
    • make compose-up
    • make run

    In short (quoting myself here):

    Don’t repeat yourself. Make Make make things happen for you!