Windows 7 added ribbons to the UI. It's unlikely it was a rewrite. Just a retooling of what Vista had, which in turn what Windows XP had, which... [continue down the line until Windows 1.0].
The proper solution is that your merge commit should describe exactly what was merged and why. Git pre-fills it with a default "Merge branch-X into branch-Y" message so you can quickly exit the editor and still have a functioning DAG. It's just not ideal to leave it like that, precisely for this reason.
Fossil (https://fossil-scm.org/home/doc/trunk/www/index.wiki) doesn't fill out a default message, and sometimes that has annoyed me, but it does make you think about what you're doing. If you look in the Fossil and SQLite trees, almost all merges include a full description of what the merge was all about and why. Fossil also doesn't forget the entire history of the branch (including from which commit it was branched from), so it has that advantage too.
Yeah, I remember DVD menus (and the rare Blu-ray that employs "interesting" menus) being fun, but even the fun ones would get in the way of actually wanting to watch the movie or TV episode at hand.
They might be bland and boring, but the menus employed today by the vast majority of discs produced are infinitely preferable in my opinion. Play Movie/Episode, Audio, Subtitles, Special Features. They're made from just a few templates and generally work the same across all discs from a studio. Doesn't bog you down with cutesy animations or wild layout choices, lets you just watch your movie in peace.
I can understand the argument of simplicity and consistency for something productivity-related, or whatever, but when watching a DVD it is almost always for the purpose of entertainment. A fun and intnrnsting menu feels like part of the experience. It is a bit more of an event with all the little added flourishes.
One of the many reason I stopped buying dvds. The adverts (unskippable), the cognitive bones etc get through to the play, some disks would even have spoilers for the film.
A non-scam product would probably be targeted exactly at that scenario: plug it in, run a server for a handful of friends. Likely anything more than 10 players would never depend on a product like this.
That's the weird part. It's trivially simple to run a Minecraft server. Slap whatever your favorite variant of Linux is, install Java, run minecraft-server.jar. Make a service for it (heck I made one many years ago, probably still works: https://gist.github.com/chungy/0b2c438c7db90b32701a).
Once you have the Raspberry Pis, pre-installing an operating system to run the standard Minecraft server should be the easy part.
Unless, of course, it really was a case of "reverse engineer and reimplement Minecraft to make my own server." Not strictly impossible, but a completely unreasonable goal.
> Unless, of course, it really was a case of "reverse engineer and reimplement Minecraft to make my own server." Not strictly impossible, but a completely unreasonable goal.
Hasn't that already been done several times? There's feather-rs (fairly mature but reduced set of features) and Pumpkin and FerrumC. And, for that matter, Paper - that one is Java and I haven't checked to what degree it's just borrowing from the original implementation, but I do know that Paper is actually used for real servers.
There are quite a few (the protocol is pretty simple and the client is very forgiving of omissions). They are often not as fully featured as the official server, though. Probably the most significant omission on most of them is world generation (I've seen some suggestions that this is kind of an unofficial line in terms of not catching legal threats).
On a similar vein, Gene Roddenberry was pretty similar with Star Trek. He had a pretty big universe imagined, got the scaffolding in for it, but all the best works under the name of Star Trek were made by other people. Anything Gene Roddenberry was directly involved in as a script writer (see: many episodes of the original and first two seasons of The Next Generation) are generally the weakest and worst parts of Star Trek.
Yeah, also I think part of that was Gene wanted to portray a more optimistic vision of the future as a principled thing, which I get, but that also made Classic and TNG feel a bit superficial and low stakes a lot of the time. DS9 is personally my favorite series, mostly because of the age I was when it came out, but also because I liked that they shifted it to be a bit less idealistic.
I still think TNG was the best, but DS9 was good too. In hindsight though, it seems like it was good to have someone like Roddenberry doggedly insisting upon his positive vision for the future. The modern Star Trek series, where there's nobody pushing for the utopian vision any more, are kind of depressing and not really in line with the idea that humanity will eventually be able to improve itself and leave behind the pettiness that holds us back today.
Yeah, I think that's fair. IMO DS9 got the balance right because it's a bit more gritty than TNG, accepts more complexity and ambiguity, but still holds up those ideals as something worth striving for even against severe difficulties.
I'm sad to say the newest Trek shows have just missed me.
Yeah same, there was the one that was both "in the past" (taking place before TNG I believe) but thanks to mushroom magic they had instant teleportation and then timey-wimey stuff so it was also a hypermodern show. The melodrama was just grating on me after a while.
Then there was Picard which actually showed some promise but I couldn't find myself caring about the new characters they tried to introduce on top of the layers of nostalgia. I heard it got a soft reboot or new writers for season 3 but I have no idea, I haven't heard anything about it.
Voyager was still good but that was the last show I actually watched on the regular.
Yeah it's aged phenomenally well, and makes more modern Star Treks so frustratingly awful. The Visitor is arguably one of the best episodes of any Star Trek ever, Past Tense was basically prophetic. And so many of the episodes are extremely insightful on human nature - For the Uniform where good can so easily become evil - In the Pale Moonlight being of a similar nature, and so many more.
One of the things I'm most looking forward to is watching the series with my kids when they're old enough.
---
Unrelated but the TNG episode Tapestry also deserves a mention. [1] Wtf happened to media. Writers used to actually understand people, now everything is so trite.
I watched it when it was originally on in the 90's. As the show got more serialized it was like a cliff hanger or huge event every few weeks. Then we got a great 10 episode arc to end the series.
Roddenberry specifically wasn't needed, Rick Berman was able to learn from his vision and maintain it. After Roddenberry died, Berman was able to maintain TNG, DS9, Voyager, and Enterprise all with the Star Trek ideals that Roddenberry always fought to maintain when he was alive. Even as Deep Space Nine and Enterprise had to seemingly throw the ideals out the window temporarily, with the Dominion and Xindi arcs, just to better demonstrate why they were so badly needed in the first place.
Unfortunately, we don't have a Rick Berman, or anyone else that maintains the same ideals, at the helm anymore.
Fossil (https://fossil-scm.org/home/doc/trunk/www/index.wiki) solves this pretty nicely. You can have documentation as files or in a special wiki namespace and it's versioned both ways, and every repository clone gets everything. Even better than that, your in-tree documentation files are rendered and browseable in exactly the same way as the dedicated wiki namespace.
The linked URL to the home page there can even serve as an example: the "trunk" is a check-in name (https://fossil-scm.org/home/doc/trunk/www/checkin_names.wiki) that points to the newest check-in on the "trunk" branch. You can replace it with any other reference to get the old version; eg, version-2.20 would work to get the version 2.20 of the docs, 2015-03-14 would work to get the version from 14 March 2015, etc.
You absolutely can use "just a /docs" directory in Fossil. You can even point the web server to /doc/trunk/docs/index.md or whatever other file names you want. :-)
Fossil was written for Sqlite in the same way that git was written for Linux. It's really a shame that more projects don't use it. I think that a github competitor (with social features, PRs, CI, etc) with a fossil backend would be very popular.
In fossil's case, every instance includes those features, this makes the social platform "the web itself"
Having said that, there are central hosting projects, but where that has some value with git, git proper is distributed and does not need it but all the auxiliary stuff does. with fossil it provides almost no value. All the auxiliary stuff is built in so all it provides is a place to host. Which is fair but hosting is not hard with fossil.
With everything included in fossil I abuse it as a personal social platform(think discord) super easy to host and it gets me chat, forums, wiki, and file storage. None of them great, but it is so easy I don't really care. voice and video do require an additional service, so there is that. Now I just need to find some friends...
Yep, I use Fossil for all my side projects. Super easy to host, tiny, includes everything I need for a project, all in one file. Great piece of software.
I've been gradually migrating my Git repos to Fossil as I've been touching them. Been quite happy with it.
There are only a couple things that I miss:
- Grouping repos together into a combined project. I'd love to be able to have a single Fossil server/instance with a single set of users, wiki pages, tickets, etc. but multiple independent codebases. Closest I've gotten to that is to simply have multiple independent branches instead of a single trunk (example: https://fsl.yellowapple.us/avorion/home), and it's worked surprisingly well, but it's clear Fossil wasn't designed with this workflow in mind, so there are some rough edges with it (albeit minor and easy to work around).
- Compatibility with things that assume you're using Git. Being able to export to Git helps a lot here, but it's still extra steps. Ideal solution here would be for the Fossil server to be able to double as a Git forge and present repos accordingly, such that I can point things like CI/CD pipelines or Terragrunt module calls or whatever directly to the Fossil repo itself over the Git interface those things expect instead of having to setup a Git forge manually and somehow synchronize everything w.r.t. access controls.
- An equivalent to Git's submodules. This would IMO help address the “grouping repos together into a combined project” case as well.
There are login-group options which lets you have a single sign on with a group of repos, To unify the other bits it looks like it would be possible to change the main menu links to the central repo(in the web settings).
Never wanted to do what you want but it sounds possible
set up the fossil server on a directory of repos probably with --repolist to get a list
fossil server --repolist /var/fossil/
get all repos in the same login-group
change the menus in each repo to point to the core repo. Based on some quick tests I suspect a full http:// url is required.
- Forum /forum {@2 3 4 5 6}
+ Forum https://mydomain.org/core/forum {@2 3 4 5 6}
The thing is that Windows is actually UCS-2, a consequence of the OS predating UTF-16 by a few years, and coming into existence when Unicode originally thought 16 bits was going to be enough.
For backwards compatibility with old file systems, there's no way the OS can start enforcing surrogate codepoints as forbidden from names. You can just so happen to pretend it's UTF-16 until it's not.
reply