mkobit

> There's a reason Meson is winning the latest build-systems war:

What do you mean by winning? I haven't heard of Meson until the last few weeks, and I haven't seen it consumed by any open source projects on GitHub, although my search biases more towards JVM things anyways.

> it only depends on python3 & ninja

I don't see how depending on both Python3 and Ninja is any less dependencies than the JVM. Python3 isn't really available by default on most distributions (maybe that is changing soon), so there is still the overhead of installing it, right? Public CI systems like Travis CI and Circle CI have images that make having a JDK easy.

The threads found on this are disappointing as well ([1] and [2]). The author(s), as far as I can tell, only make the source available for each release. They do not want a public repository and are very resistant when others ask.

They do make the source available with each release, and a user has mirrored them onto GitHub [3]. I also cannot find the source for older releases.

[1] https://sourceforge.net/p/keepass/discussion/329220/thread/0...

[2] https://sourceforge.net/p/keepass/discussion/329220/thread/b...

[3] https://github.com/dlech/KeePass2.x

That post seems like quintessential trolling. It was my expectation as well when going to the page to just click the "Go" button and see what the results would be, and I think the suggestion is great feedback. I think it is generally in the spirit of these "Show HN" posts to give and get feedback and discuss with the creator. The response post to that user, to me, is patronizing and is undoubtedly going to ruffle some feathers. But, now we aren't even talking about the OPs cool project...

I can't even get to that page as it times out as well.

EDIT: I opened the original link in incognito mode and the page seemed to load fine.

On StackOverflow reputation is subtracted when downvoting answers but not questions [1], which is a neat approach. On your own profile, you can see the proportion of upvotes to downvotes (as well as other activity), but others cannot (maybe moderators?). So, there is at least some personal impact to having a user be accountable for a downvote. There is also generally a culture of "if you downvote, you should explain why", which sometimes seems to be here on HN as well. I remember Disqus removed the downvote count some time back, and Facebook doesn't have a "Dislike" button, so there are different approaches to it. I wonder what some other approaches some communities have taken, and what would be effective? Or even, what is the desired impact?

[1]: https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/251610/why-does-dow...

[2]: https://disqus.com/home/discussion/supportqa/why_was_the_dow...

I agree that the tooling is getting better. Some of the popular libraries are still figuring out the right patterns to apply to make them more "Kotlin friendly". Tools like the Checker Framework [1], JSR 308 [2], and compiler plugins like Traute [3] can also help with the safety issues on the Java side. Kotlin is beginning to understand these more, and some of the basic annotations are supported, but the tooling is only going to improve with all of the backing that Kotlin currently has.

[1]: https://checkerframework.org/

[2]: https://jcp.org/en/jsr/detail?id=308

[3]: https://github.com/denis-zhdanov/traute

Do you mean for Bazel itself or for building apps with bazel?

Bazel is still a bit away from having Java 9 support [1] and it still requires some system dependencies (for the other languages and cross system support).

I wish more tools would go the "static binary" path that make it easy to build and use wrappers without having to figure out system configuration every single time.

[1] https://github.com/bazelbuild/bazel/issues/3410

I can understand why management would want to choose Atlassian.

* The idea of the "Atlassian Ecosystem", in that buying more of their services seems to work better.

* On-premise for most of their tools

* Pricing. For example, Bitbucket Server - $26,400 for 500-1000 users /year [1]. GitHub Enterprise - $2,500 per 10 users / year [2]. Self-hosted GitLab - $39 or $199 per user / year (Starter compared to Enterprise Edition Premium package) [3]. If at a 1000 users, that is $26,400 compared to $250,000 or $39,000/$200,000.

* "Other big companies use them"

* "Reporting and metrics"

* "There is a plugin for that"

But, I and most of the other developers I have worked with hate every single Atlassian product we use. JIRA eventually turns into a micromanagement tool with all of the customization people think they want. People seem to think that because it is customizable, it will solve their problems. It always seems to take up more time and resources to try and bend their tools to do anything useful than it is to just say, "well, I guess we don't really need that".

[1]: https://www.atlassian.com/licensing/bitbucket-server

[2]: https://enterprise.github.com/features#pricing

[3]: https://about.gitlab.com/products/

That was clever and I had a good chuckle at it, too. I originally saved the page as a resource but a once-a-week email with this kind of material is definitely worth the time.

This comment will shed light on:

* Committed to Personal Growth

Those kinds of use cases are what Git LFS [1] was created to help with. The major Git vendors support it (Bitbucket, GitHub, GitLab). I'm not as certain about the open source implementations.

[1] https://git-lfs.github.com/

I agree - you lose the build history, ability to see the incremental changes the author intended, can't go back to the code review to see what happened on that specific commit. I have a very difficult time understanding the desire to use --squash and merge --ff. The problem to me seems like a presentation issue, not a data issue.

I'm not familiar with Block chain terminology, so I was not aware of the collision.

A previous response in the thread [1] also contains "hard fork", which is probably why I and possibly others have repeated it here.

It could be a trend, but my differentiation (here at least) is that a "hard" fork means that the maintainers themselves are splitting from the original project while also forking the original code base.

It would probably make more sense to just call it a "fork" :).

[1]: https://mailman.cs.umd.edu/pipermail/findbugs-discuss/2016-N...

Further on in the email chain, it looks like there is momentum for hard forking under another project named 'SpotBugs' [1, 2]. I hope to see the project live on as it has been useful. Other tools like Google's Error Prone and IntelliJ's inspection toolset are awesome, and FindBugs is complimentary to them.

[1] https://mailman.cs.umd.edu/pipermail/findbugs-discuss/2016-N...

[2] https://github.com/spotbugs/spotbugs

For those looking for some open source HFT Java code, you may be interested in looking at some of the code in OpenHFT [1].

[1]: https://github.com/OpenHFT

The many "standards" of Markdown also now include CommonMark [1]. There is also some interesting history as to why it is not named "Standard Markdown".

[1] http://commonmark.org/ [2] https://blog.codinghorror.com/standard-markdown-is-now-commo...

I don't like the Dockerfile or Jenkinsfile either, but I can kind of understand the .travis.yml. The good thing about the "Dockerfile" is that with most of the docker commands that interact with it, you can use the '-f' option to specify the file. For example "docker build -f dockerfiles/application.dockerfile" -t myapplication .". I don't see any easy way to do that with the Jenkinsfile.

The amount of top-level files in these projects has started to become quite large, and it is unclear at first glance to see what it is important when exploring a new ecosystem.

I'd like to see these products would move in a direction where these were would do any/some of the following:

1) use a file extension rather than "important" describing filename (.docker for Dockerfiles and .groovy/.jenkins for Jenkinsfile)

2) moved into a product specific folder (travisci/ci.yml, github/ for the issue and pull request templates)

3) use yet another top level file for indirection that is agreed upon (my initial thought is something named integrations.yml)

There was recently talks around changing it, and most of the feedback was very negative. You can see the initial post here [1] and the follow up post here [2].

1: https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/271080/the-mit-lice... 2: https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/272956/a-new-code-l...

I don't think these necessarily cover all of the responses that can be made, but I think it is a great start to getting simple feedback like this. Like other users mentioned, it would be awesome to be able to sort or perform some kind of action based on the quantify of the reactions.

I wonder if they will allow for repository owners to select which reactions they will allow? I think that would help with the limited selection but still allow owners to select what they consider useful to them.

I am fairly certain it is on the Spinnaker roadmap. There was a recent talk by Sangeeta Narayanan on "Containers so Far" [1]. At 37:10~ you can see how they will essentially be allowing for containers to replace AMIs in the "bake" process. I'm looking forward to seeing how Netflix start to roll out more container support, and seeing how Spinnaker progresses.

[1] http://www.infoq.com/presentations/netflix-containers

I'm interested in knowing more about the "25 Jenkins masters" that they have, and how much they have modified/built for Jenkins to make it work for them.

We are currently in a state of "big ball of plugins and configuration". A bunch of plugins have been installed, and lots of manual configuration has been put into jobs so that everybody has what they need to build their software. It has led to Jenkins being a "do everything" workflow system. The easy path that Jenkins provides, to me, seems like the wrong one - it makes it easy to just stuff everything in there because it "can" do it. This seems to leads to tons of copy/paste, drift, all types of different work being represented, and it is starting to become unmanageable.

Have others seen this happen when using Jenkins? How have you dealt with it?

Wow. This is so incredibly useful to me.

The general workflow I have followed was, "Download PDF if present. If documentation can be shown in single HTML page, download it, change all the anchors to point to my own filesystem". This changes everything in such a simple, useful, way.

Cool idea! I'll definitely be stealing this. Have you thought of making it searchable or generating a site your posts? Anything you would have wished you had done differently since you started it?

> "Despite the importance of a shared standard, after six months of effort the Open Container Initiative (OCI) body has yet to decide whether it should or should not develop and standardize an image format. Today, the primary focus of the OCI community is creating standards for the container runtime environment, rather than the container image. Specs for container runtime features are also a worthy discussion, but we think there is a more urgent need – and a more open, industry-wide upside – for a standard container image specification."

I haven't been following the OCI at all, but could somebody shed some light as to why the runtime is the most important part to standardize? Also, any insight as to whether or not the container image format should be standardized?

I don't have any comments about the content, but I really liked that there was a TL;DR at the top of the article to set the stage regarding what I was about to read. I wish more articles would do that!

I started using Pocket a few months ago and really enjoy it. The offline reading is great for public transit, and it gives me a good backlog of articles that I want to read. I do find it hard to keep my rate of finished/incoming above 1 with all the other things I try to make some time for!

Full list of "What's new in PostgreSQL 9.5" - https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/What%27s_new_in_PostgreSQL_...

A lot of goodies around JSONB additions. In 9.4, there wasn't much support for updates to JSONB values, but now there will be some support for document-esque operations:

- jsonb || jsonb (concatenate / overwrite) : combine 2 jsonb objects and if there's overlap, values are replaced at the highest level

- jsonb - text / int (remove key / array element) : remove key or an array element

- jsonb #- text[] / int (remove key / array element in path) : remove key/array at path - jsonb_set function : update value at path

I am not sure if I saw it HN recently, but there is an article by Phusion [1] talking about the init process and how to handle it with Docker. They have a base image, baseimage-docker [2], that is supposed to solve that problem.

[1]: https://blog.phusion.nl/2015/01/20/docker-and-the-pid-1-zomb... [2]: https://phusion.github.io/baseimage-docker/

I feel the opposite way about the IntelliJ/Eclipse (strongly prefer IntelliJ over Eclipse). I stopped using Eclipse at, I believe, Juno or Kepler (4.2/4.3) and switched to IntelliJ 13. I found that Eclipse very frequently just plain froze while doing an operation, was laggy, and crashed frequently. There was also very long startup times.

I haven't used Eclipse in a few versions, but when I made the switch I was extremely thankful that I did. What makes you prefer Eclipse? Or, rather, what makes you dislike IntelliJ?

I still think there is a lot of value in both the 'this is how this API is typically used' and the 'see other examples'. Even if the authors of the code provide some sort of documentation and examples for how things are used, there is lot of data about how consumers actually use their API's.

I think it would be really cool to be able to see how others (publicly or privately) use certain APIs. I think it would help with faster adoption and "crowdsourcing" documentation. I can't tell you how many times I have had to Google/Stack Overflow Spring (and other library) specific things because I just wasn't sure if it could be used in a certain context based on the documentation present in an IDE or the project's documentation.

What about bro.bot? It doesn't seem like there are too many 'fun' words that end in .bot