skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
My personal opinion is that it breaks history and CI tests for all the feature branches. But at GitLab we encountered customers that insisted on having a linear history after migrating from SVN. Therefore there is a function in the UI of GitLab EE to rebase a merge request when accepting the merge request. See http://doc.gitlab.com/ee/workflow/rebase_before_merge.html
"Toxins" could be a poor word choice on my part. But our body can be slowed down with the modern food we eat, the poor environments we live in, and genetic predisposition. I think fasting is a way to remove road blocks in our body, for whatever reason they appeared.

But to be clear, I think a lifestyle of eating fruits and veggies is more effective than fasts, when trying to achieve this.

There are a lot of medical, yes scientific, benefits to fasting. At the end of the day, it helps the body out (strengthens immune system), among other ways, whereas it might be struggling with eating regularly. Also, most research would never encourage people to go without eating more than seven days, as that's starvation mode and the Hippocratic oath has some things to say about that.
It is just the usual suspects trying to make you shut up.

That said some of the socialists parties here in Denmark made ending that kind of discrimination part of their election reform.
I have never understood why people hate merge commits so much. Their advantages are not insignificant: you know when a feature got merged in master, its much easier to revert a feature if you have a merge commit for it, much easier to generate a change log with merge commits, and you have none of the problems that pushing "cleaned up" histories will have: https://www.mail-archive.com/dri-devel@lists.sourceforge.net...

The main disadvantage, as the article rightly points out, is that it makes it much harder to read the history. But that's easily solved with a simple switch: --no-merges. It works with git-log, gitk, tig, and probably others too. Use --no-merges, and get a nice looking linear history without those pesky merge commits.
The glaring problem I have seen with nearly all of those studies and discussions is that they all seem to underestimate or even neglect the costs of losing good candidates.
Probably saves money where most job listing sites post per listing. You can simply list that you're hiring for multiple open positions in the listing itself.
> When you're young is OK to have a high percentage of your net worth in a house, but not when you're getting close to retirement.

That said, if you actually own your home in retirement you've significantly mitigated against the risk of getting priced out by rising rents if the regional economy heats up. That could be a problem on a fixed income.
I do something very similar; use master for dev builds that can be shared (since it's the default branch) and something like 'deploy' or 'deployprod' (which on second thought is a bit redundant) for release. Then, using a CI tool, you can have master go to a staging environment and deployprod go to production.
You might want to cherry pick some commits from the dev branch into a stable branch from time to time (security fixes, things like that).
7 Tech jargons you should know to avoid being archaic
Wouldn't a back end engineer most likely have been working on proprietary source code for their time with the previous company?

Or are you talking about code they've written out of work hours? If so, that's never going to be indicative of the kind of code they can and normally do write is it?

* To clarify, I'm asking because I'm nearing the end of my third year at my first dev job at an engineering consultancy as an enterprise Java/Spring/Hibernate/Gradle developer and am planning to leave in the next few months but the question of how to demonstrate code to a potential employer is one that worries me.

I cannot show anything I have been working on here as it is wholly proprietary and my development outside of work is not at all comparative.
We use a master / development branch strategy. For us, the main problem with having one branch and tagging releases is that it's relatively common for work to continue on the development branch while the release branch is still being tested. For us, there's a 2 day period where we're testing out the upcoming release. Developers will be fixing bugs on this release branch, and also commiting new code for the subsequent release. If we had one branch with tags, developers would need to keep all their new code on feature branches until a release is completed, and the likelihood of accidentally releasing an untested feature gets a lot higher (one advantage of having two branches is that you can treat your production branch with a lot more care)
Cook Up Your Build Variants
Ask HN: Whatever happened to dojo?
The dojo javascript library seems to have lots of utility mechanisms, lots of UI components, require functionality, etc for javascript. The community seems somewhat active, but I have heard very very little about it. Is there a reason for this? Are there any haters of dojo out here willing to share their reasons, or maybe any proponents who can shed some light into the health of the project?
> It is (literally) "non-strict" and that means that it intersperses both modes.

That's not actually what "non-strict" means. https://wiki.haskell.org/Lazy_vs._non-strict
'Toxins' could be a poor word choice on my part. There are things, within fat, that disrupt our body's ability to function. It could just be 'its bad fat' that was ingested by a poor diet.
I'm sorry if I was misleading, my intention was not say that 4-day work week doesn't work.

I just didn't have to use the day for meetings like I originally planned and instead I was able to write that blog post that you just observed.
Posted a link to this prior blog of mine in article comments also - http://michaeldehaan.net/post/116465000577/understanding-whe... - but I'm a huge fan of rebase and topic branches.

One main branch is great, and also if working with a large number of contributors I really like a clean history, and makes things much easier to review.

It's kind of a shame something got branded with a slick name like "GitFlow", when "doing it the way you ought to be doing it" doesn't have a slick name :)
Questions like that are like testing if somebody can touch type by asking questions like "which sequence of finger presses would you use to type qWaMvz%e3("? It's not how we normally access the information. I could type that in a second, but it would be a struggle to tell you how to type that. I'd have to put my hands under the desk and simulate typing it to tell you.

I'm not against talking about such things in an interview; a suprising number of people that claim expertise in a language have apparently never used it, but the interviewer has to understand what their question is actually measuring. With question like that you are often measuring if their brain can recall information in unconventional ways, or if they read an interview book in the last few days. The old standby that was popular awhile ag: "define OO" - if you haven't memorized the book definition it can be hard to rattle off. Doesn't mean you couldn't have a multi hour discussion about OO, functional, and procedural programming, and more importantly make reasonable and sophisticated design decisions based on your understanding of these things.
I'm not familiar with the gui git tools, preferring instead to work on the command line, but does whatever tool the author used to generate the graphs used on the web page support command line flags?

Specifically, git log --first-parent (--oneline --decorate) would look much better with the documented strategy. Instead of seeing all the commits in the branch, all that's shown is the merge commit. If you used the article's branch names, all you'd see is:

* Merge branch 'feature/SPA-138' into develop

* Merge branch 'feature/SPA-156' into develop

* Merge branch 'feature/SPA-136' into develop

If you actually used descriptive branch names, that would actually seem to be quite useful - see immediately see the features being added without seeing all the gritty details!
Women in programming should find it offensive because it changes how they are viewed. Generally, the more help a sub group is seen being given to fit into the larger group, the less the larger group thinks that the sub group belongs on their own merits. Add in incidents like Donglegate and people will begin to get a foundation to ground their biases which were originally unfounded.
>at least by my terms
Show HN: Send end-to-end encrypted email from Gmail
It is better to have a messy but realistic history if you want to trace back what happend and who did and tested what at what time. I prefer my code to be clean and my history to be correct.

^^^ Couldn't agree more.

However, I don't know why people want to avoid rebasing feature branches. Rebasing feature branches means that you only have to resolve the conflict once and have a clean history for your release branch. Granted, it works well in my team where only a single developer owns a given feature branch.
I like to start with a discussion, rather than a presentation and Q&A. For me, I find that really understanding the problem is the hard part. Once I really know what I need, what my requirements are, the options fall into place.

Today, for example, I'm going to have a whiteboarding session with one of my employees. We're going to whiteboard the problem we're solving, again, and again, until we both can describe high and low level details in our sleep.

Then we'll do a few searches and leverage other people's experiences to pick our technologies.

The also works for pure architectural discussions. You have a queue between your web server and web workers -- why? etc.
Yeah, we also use something like this for building a website/webapp (for a client) with 5-10 people.

- Feature branch: do whatever you want

- Develop: should be good enough for the client (product owner) to look at

- Release branch: should be good enough to be tested by the test/QA team

- Master: should be good enough for website visitors

Branches are meant to be shortlived and merged (and code reviewed) into develop as soon as possible. We use feature toggles to turn off functionalities that end up in develop but can not go to production.
Ask HN: Can Someone Recommend a Wordpress Ninja?
(self recommendation acceptable)

Got to get one who can take simple instructions and apply
them on a existing Wordpress site.

Not a big deal, yet final outcome got to be clean, elegant
and balanced.

The schedule is tight, please send me a short email to:
tzury@reblaze.com.
Good point. I guess the distinction I had in mind is that it doesn't run in the browser and doesn't serve HTML, but you're right that it is pretty web focused.
Retirees, students, the unemployed and the travelling businessmen/self employed that have the ability to fit a couple of hours into the middle of a workday. People that work in retail/service jobs that don't necessarily work a generic Monday-Friday. Night workers. People at companies with flexi-hours.

That said, I'd love to balance my work with the ability to not stand in queues for shops because I can only go at the same time as the majority of other people. I do much of my food shopping as close to midnight as possible and buy most other things online to avoid the crowds.

Passed a certain (lowish) threshold of income, I'd almost universally rather less hours than more money.
I am confused by your point. Would you rather sick people come into work and get even more people sick?
The problem, at least for me, is not the merge commit. They are indeed easily ignored. The problem is, that I don't want to see a dozen commits fixing typos or trivial bugs.
Property will always increase over the long term.

I'm not picking on you, but it's amazing how quickly Americans (not saying you're from the US) forget economic events that happened only a few years back.

There are many places in the US where housing prices haven't come close to the peak in 2007. I knew several folks who lost a ton of money ($100K+) on real estate back then. It seems like all of those concerns have evaporated in the last 8 years.
No, I'm with you on this.

> The original plan was to use the fifth day for non-billable work such as searching clients, meeting with people, doing mandatory paperwork, writing blog posts, doing something that would later generate passive income etc.

If you're not billing on the 5th day, but you're still doing work, then you don't have a 4 day work week.
> “Daddy? Why is water wet?” And the proper answer is: strong tetrahedral hydrogen bonding, which they then related to their teachers for years afterward whenever the subject of water came, they’d say, “Strong tetrahedral hydrogen bonding!” But that’s the correct answer. That’s what makes water wet.
I think this answer the HOW water is wet question not the WHY water is water question.
I've heard that, and now that I'm a parent I'm definitely jealous. Unfortunately (at least in this regard!), I'm in the US.
> Are there any reliable ways to get answers to such questions from people who are experienced?

In my experience, the challenge with soliciting this kind of feedback is in filtering the responses. Opinions are formed for a variety of reasons. Some are well formed from experience, while others are simply dogma:

Authority Figure X says to use Solution Y.

or cargo cult:

Successful Company X uses Solution Y, so you should too.

It's worth considering why authority figures recommend specific solutions, but that informs you as to the reasons why you should use a particular solution, not that you should always use a particular solution.

Giving a good recommendation first requires that the offerer of the opinion have the qualifications necessary to be considered an authority on the problem domain; second, that they invest the requisite time in understanding your unique set of circumstances; and finally, that they are prepared to set aside any dogmatic beliefs they have developed along the way. You must be prepared to filter the opinions you receive in order to avoid incorporating advice affected by these shortcomings.

Rather that solicit advice on your entire infrastructure, you should do two things:

1) You should seek to understand the technologies you're implementing to a depth that allows you to identify potential pitfalls. In other words, understand what a particular solution is good and bad at.

2) Try to hire/work with people who specialize in specific problem domains. A jack-of-all-trades can only have so much depth.
Thanks for the tip, I'm also quite far into the process with a second company, and still making calls to friends at other places. I do have a question though.

When asked about whether you are interviewing elsewhere, what should I answer? Be vague and 1 or 2 other places? Or name specific companies/roles? What should I say when they ask what your first choice would be if you were extended similar offers at all these places (it also seems to be a standard question)?

Sorry for being off-topic. I've read Patrick Mackenzie's Salary Negotiation advice post 3x now, and it left me wondering about the above.
I don't think I read a complaint in this post?
Title is overhyped.

"just by knowing your victim's mobile number"

should read:

"just by knowing your victim's mobile number AND having victim stupid enough to send YOU verification code"
I suspect it's more that if you build websites you are more familiar with github.
Quite an interesting talk. I liked the format: "How to get more rps?..."

It's humbling to think of the scale that some other folks deal with. I'm concerned of 2x growth with running a couple thousand sites on a dozen servers.

You can't just hit up SO when you run into a problem at Facebook's scale.
It heavily depends on the area. In very urban areas, property is a lot more expensive, and renting is probably the way to go. In my area, it's almost the same cost to buy as to rent. The difference being, you can get some of the money back on your purchase by selling your property, whereas your rent just entered a black hole.
has this ever actually happened?
very nice idea! :-)

perhaps it needs:

* something to zoom the map (and thus, filtering messages for a given radius)
* and/or something to organize messages in a way they don't overlap :P (eg: balloons with a number, when clicked it shows the full list of messages)
To cover the company's ass in case someone is injured on the job by an impaired person. Without drug testing, the injured party has a good case, saying management was asleep at the wheel. But with drug testing, management can say they did screen for drugs, no mutter how asleep they are.
Could you expand on what do you mean by rebase breaking CI tests? I don't see how that's possible.
I wonder however about the opposite effect. I think it was Bertrand Russell who said that boredom is an essential part of doing good work and learning to accept it an important part of getting good at something. If we make things too easy, flashy and fun for kids there is, I fear, the likelihood of setting wrong expectations, which will in short order sabotage the child's interest and effort.
Data and machine learning in advertising, with Claudia Perlich
I think the difficulty of such problems is what frustrates me about them. If asked me to build a whole new computer operating system there are 100s of books I could turn to to get me started. When it comes to these big social issues, I don't even know where to begin.
Why does I7 get worse battery life than I3?
I know I7 consumes more power than I3. But my question still remains.

Is it impossible for the processor to throttle itself on lower load e.g. Web browsing, document typing? I.E. If I'm just browsing, why can't I7 last as long as I3?

Better still, can't users get a SWITCH to optimize for battery life or power.

SP3 spurred my question. Many would love the I7 version for the horse power. But would have to settle for considerable less battery life.

Can't Intel make some changes that would allow more powerful processors to last as long as the less powerful ones at lower load?

Lastly, am I the only one who desires this?
Looking at the recent history i can see how you'd come to like it. You seem to mostly be doing merges or documentation changes, which probably means you don't have to do a lot of history spelunking to fix bugs caused months ago.

Are you sure your developers feel the same as you do? Are you sure they're willing to be open enough to you about their misgivings?
That's true.

However, the risk is that you have a 60 year old, nearing retirement with 90% of his/her net worth locked up in an asset. They are counting on being able to sell and use the equity for retirement.

If you own your home outright and have a nice chunk of cash in retirement funds, then you're fine. Of course that also means you're very diversified (some cash in real estate, some cash in the market).
Card Expansion Effect with SVG ClipPath
Is this more a limitation of your CI/deployment tools? What we do (not saying it's the true way) is have TeamCity automatically build both master (production code + hotfixes) and development branches. Our deployment tool (Octopus) can just grab a particular release (e.g. 1.1.500=master 1.1.501=development) and send it to the server for testing. Hotfixes would be committed to master and tested with a build from there.

I guess this does open up the possibility that merging master (with hotfixes) back into development could cause a regression, but we certainly try to keep hotfixes minimal and simple.

Now database changes...that's the real pain point. Both master and development need their own DB to apply changes scripts to. Otherwise, deltas from development make testing master an issue.
Nobody's talking about Apple's biggest developer news: Bitcode
Then rebase interactive is your friend. Clean up your feature branch BEFORE merging in to the release branch.
Congratulations to the AllydeMautic team for your dedication and commitment to bring the best of marketing automation solutions and support to every business and organization.
I just started on a large project with a large health care company and found myself burning through the work I had. Just this week I spoke with my manager and he agreed to allow me a 4X10 week so I can take Fridays off. The only stipulation is I have to be on any calls or meetings on Fridays.

I would be sure to ask in advance. Since there's a huge shortage of developers right now (at least in the midwest where I am) you might have a good argument to make if a company is in need and willing to negotiate.

Always, always, always ask. You never know when an employer is willing to negotiate to get a good developer on their team.
Computer horror stories [1993] [pdf]
> Who are they selling to on workdays anyway? Jobless people?

There are a whole lot of people in the world who's jobs are not "9-5" office jobs. Also on any given day there are a bunch of people who took the day off. And then there are the elderly, medical leave, etc.
But if buying is like putting $500k of shares in a company (this is a really expensive house, man), renting is throwing your cash out the window.

I mean, your mileage is going to vary on location, and a generic thread like this isn't necessarily all that useful, but in my area, a mortgage payment is actually less than a rental payment for a similar place.

So even if it's a "bad investment", I can reclaim at least some of the money I put into a purchase when I sell the place (or make a profit, but no guarantees). But I get nothing when I stop renting.
I would like to see how many people are in there (screen-wise).
>It's as if Ars had said "we googled up their website" while showing a picture of them using Bing, or if they had said "We enjoyed some Coke after the demo" and had a picture of them holding a can of Pepsi.

No, it's not that at all. Ars was making a comparison to actual IMAX, not using it as a generic.

"This new pepsi tastes as good as coke"
The article was certainly a bit casual with its terms, but as a human being, you shouldn't be generally nervous about mere socialization with others. You may be specifically nervous, if you need to impress the others, or if you're in a foreign land for the first time, but you should not generally be nervous about all social interaction. If you are, you have a problem. It may not be something that we should necessarily throw medication at, we've all got problems of one sort or another, the benefits of medication may not outweigh the costs, but it is a problem.

Nervousness is different than boredom, lack of desire, or lack of seeking it out. I can cover those bases quite well. I often don't want to socialize. But I'm not fearful of it, I just find it boring in most groups.

On the other hand, "public speaking", as in, getting up in front of a crowd and making any sort of speech, well, I've heard multiple people who make a living doing it that they never actually stop being nervous about it before hand. They learn how to get through it, but they're always nervous. Heck, I daresay such nerves are rational, really. That would seem to be a different category of issue.
Same here, also having a 4-day work-week planning to run some sort of side-project. Actually all i do is fixing stuff of previous side-projects, setting op PoC's for new projects en creating a big pile of poo.

Besides that, dogs, cats and child need attention all day long, so sitting at home does not work at 1 day a week.

Now i am planning to give all that up, and just add the day to my work-week.

A full time job, without sideprojects, sounds more comfortable than a mess of private-work-life. It keeps your head spinning all day, not reaching the goals you imagined.

I am not able to take all day working on my own projects, so this seems like the only option to play safe and clear my head.
5 Simple Ways to Skyrocket Your Meetings to an Elon Musk Level