When it goes under, you lose just that months fee. In the mean time you get to go the movie theatre.
7,174 karma · joined February 18, 2010
Portfolio: http://deltaregeer.com/ Engineering Notebook: http://funcptr.net/
delta@regeer.org
When it goes under, you lose just that months fee. In the mean time you get to go the movie theatre.
I'd like an invite, and would be very interested in seeing how you built your Pyramid application (I'm a core dev for Pyramid/WebOb/Waitress) when it goes open source.
It's almost as if you didn't read my post.
Unless I can go register all my domains to be in the HSTS preload, I'd much rather Chrome tried HTTPS first, so I don't have to run a web server on port 80 that sends a 303 with https as the protocol.
Except that if the user is not visiting for the first time, then HSTS comes into play if the security headers are set, browsers can let the user know something is amiss.
We both agree that fail-open security is useless, but right now Chrome and other browsers default to going to port 80 for first visit instead of port 443. All I am asking is that the default becomes 443, and the fall-back, for first visit, is port 80.
This way I can stop running web servers on port 80 that do nothing but send a 303 with https as the protocol for that particular domain.
That would be the more useful change. If HTTPS fails (due to hostname mismatch for example), fall back to HTTP and warn, but trying HTTPS first would be fantastic and eliminate one round trip for many of my sites that are not in the HSTS preload...
We could do zero downtime, 1 or 2 packets lost live migration of workloads from one hypervisor host to another and had full ECMP capabilities.
We did this with both IPv4 and IPv6. There is nothing special about IPv6, but it does make it easier to aggregate routes.
There really isn't a whole lot of work that needs to be done to support IPv6 in an application, especially new build.
> I don’t require an apology
Get turned into:
> [...] this demand for apology nonsense [...]
If I go twice in a month I can skip a month and not feel bad.
I don't buy concessions though, so theres no money to be made there.
Only being able to see a feature film once, not something I am entirely happy about because I'd have liked to see the new Avengers twice, but I can live with it. It does allow me to go to a movie I wouldn't usually see just because it's "free".
It's the reason so many "nutrition" companies can get away with claiming all kinds of things such as "burn fat faster". That statement means something to you and I, but it's not a medical statement.
I expect it to continue being a naturally aspirated engine with no STI badging, but I may be surprised.
Also, Subaru STI has already been using the 2.0 DIT engine for the WRX STI in Japan. See the WRX STI S208: https://www.caranddriver.com/news/wing-swap-jdm-subaru-wrx-s...
A WRX hatchback would be amazing
https://devguide.python.org/#status-of-python-branches
Each Python version is supported for 5 years. So if you start building on Python 3.6 you are guaranteed to have a supported version till 2021. Upgrade to 3.7 (due out in June) when released and you'll be set till 2023.
So yes, Python does offer free LTS.
> Ik steur je wel even een appje
(I'll send you an message on WhatsApp)
is the norm in The Netherlands. My entire family, extended family, and everyone around them is all on WhatsApp. While I communicate with iMessage/SMS with friends in the US, that's not the case outside of the US. Everyone seems to have WhatsApp, most people don't use Google hangouts or other services alongside that, let alone SMS.
Why would I expect a package manager to also restart my services?
I need to make sure that other parts of the stack can either handle that service going away gracefully, or have automation around it, my package manager can't know the dependencies in which certain services should be stopped/started for example to allow for graceful failover. It's illogical to try and place all of that logic in the package manager, that is not its job. Especially if there are other config changes that need to happen too that are not part of that package management system.
Humans can still be out of the picture without a package manager starting/stopping/restarting services. Your suggestion of it being part of a maturity model don't make sense. I asked for the package to be upgraded, not for the service to be restarted.
I don't mind it creating a postgres account, but what I do mind is the package automatically enabling the service, and starting the service.
Even worse, on Linux, most packages will be helpful, for example upgrading the MongoDB package on CentOS? It'll helpfully restart the service for you.
Nevermind that you've just scripted this and it's being run on all of the servers all at once so instead of doing a nice easy rolling upgrade WHEN you are finally ready, it's done at the same time.
I hate this behaviour. Let me worry about the lifetime of processes, don't auto enable them, don't auto configure them, let me worry about making sure systemd knows it is time to start/stop them.
FreeBSD let's me upgrade packages all day long, and until I restart the service, nothing happens. That way I can upgrade the packages, make sure everything looks good, then restart the service.
That is something you and I both have experienced with this laptop :P
As for the rest, it really is bad. Like really bad. Although I did get lucky, I have 0 dead pixels.
Fine grained locking works, but is expensive for non-multithreaded applications and slows down Python. It would speed up multithreaded applications though.