All I can say is nobody answers online surveys anymore it seems :( I tried and failed hard with that. Speaking it people directly gave me more insights.
The best approach is to build a prototype and test the waters.
Yes, just not at the same time. If you can you want to enable WAL (that requires some shared memory primitives, so same machine generally), because otherwise writes block reads
Afaik SQLite in WAL mode takes your writes but still serializes the commits, so no SQLite-specific synchronization primitives needed. You might run into SQLITE_BUSY, in which case you can play with the timeout https://www.sqlite.org/c3ref/busy_timeout.html
Want to hear alternate view points. Why is Red Hat obligated to release source code. They had done this in the past, for decades. They are trying something else now. Why hold them on the hook for this? Practically all companies use Linux and open source. Barely any contributes or keeps their source code open. For example, no hosting company I know has their code open. Practically no SaaS has code open (sure, you can give me 10 examples, but I can you 1 million examples in the contrary).
To start with, I totally sympathize with Red Hat on this one. The question is not whether Red Hat deserves to do this, but whether the _LICENSE_ allows them to do so.
> Why is Red Hat obligated to release source code
They are not obligated to release source code to the public. But they _are_ obligated to put no restrictions whatsoever on redistribution (100% clone or not).
From the GPL:
"You may not impose any further restrictions on the exercise of the rights granted or affirmed under this License. For example, you may not impose a license fee, royalty, or other charge for exercise of rights granted under this License."
Red Hat is basically saying "We understand that the GPL allows you to redistribute our product as is. But, if you do, we will terminate our relationship with you.". IMO that is no different than a company saying "Yes, you have a statutory right for refunds within 30 days. However, if you exercise it, we will not sell you any products in the future.". That counts as a (indirect) restriction in my book.
> Why is Red Hat obligated to release source code.
Because the GPL requires them to do so for their users. They are circumventing this by making anyone who re-publishes the source (allowed by the GPL) ex-users.
I see. But I thought RHEL is a distribution. The issue here is that they are making patches to software and keeping all the patches behind a paywall ? My understanding is that packaging source code can be any license, not needed to be GPL.
That's not the issue. There's nothing wrong (neither legally nor philosophically) with sources being behind a paywall, as long as all their binaries are behind the same paywall too.
You see many confused people talking about that around, but they're just that - confused. The real problem is that there's a threat of termination of your paid plan once you exercise your GPL freedoms, which is at best fishy. Technically you still have access to all your GPL freedoms, but the GPL states that there must not be any further restrictions, and this certainly feels like one.
Because the terms of the GPL license prohibits added restrictions, therefore these new coercive retributive actions against code sharing (an explicit right of the user) is a violation of the GPL.
Because angry HNers who downvote you demand free (as in beer) software and are pissed that someone actually wants to pay their employees for Linux development.
CentOS existed before it was bought and shutdown. (There is something called CentOS Stream today, but it’s a completely different product with completely different purpose)
All the “rebuilders” redhat is complaining are just CentOS folks continuing to do their thing after their name was bought. So this is almost as old as redhat. Not “a new treat”
> For work, I know when my work is great because co-workers and managers praise it: "nice fix", "some really good insights here", etc.
They only said nice and good though not great. I would say if your CEO came down and said that's awesome, then it's great work. (for you)
As for me, I don't think too much about word semantics. No advice can be given or taken if you take each word apart. We will just keep arguing about details and miss the point.
It depends how much you value/respect your co-workers. In a high level team “good insight” can mean “great work”. I am not saying you disagree with this, but you may have made assumptions about the parent’s team and his relation to it. Conversely, a “great work” from a CEO can mean nothing to a person
I feel same about salaries. Paying monthly salary is a scam. Can I buy your time for life for a 1 time payment?
But seriously, calling subscription a "scam" is very delusional. It seems like you have not released a product/saas. I support your effort in supporting and contributing to opensource though.
You can buy my work for this month and pay me once. If you would like my newer, additional work, you’ll have to pay me again. Incidentally, because I’m nice I’ll let you keep the work I already did for you without charging you again for it.
I think in this case it depends on perspective to describe whether or not something is a scam.
It's absurdly unfair that I get to buy a door, a handgun, wire shelving, plumbing fixtures, etc, etc, for a 1 time payment.
It's wild to see all this churn in the markets as players bloom, ship product, and die within the year. It's so sad that they're evergreen (never before having released a product) and are leaving money on the table, dooming themselves to failure.
When will they learn that recurring revenue is the only way they'll stay in business? I'd like _someone_ to stick around long enough to honor my three, five, and ten-year warranties!
it says a lot about the state of society when I actually cannot tell if you're being sarcastic or not. I think it's sarcasm, I'm almost convinced it is, but at the same time it's an argument that I'd expect Big Tech companies to make.
Sure, pay me $10m upfront and I'm all yours for the 40 years I expect to work. I invest some of that and it turns into $20-$30m or more. Huge win tonget upfront payment if you're fine speculating a bit with the money.
>But seriously, calling subscription a "scam" is very delusional.
I think converting a one payment package to a reoccurring payment is a scam.
I have a dumb question. Do advertised salaries in EU include tax or are tax deducted. Because I'm the US you get paid $100k but there are taxes and healthcare costs that need to be deducted.
It doesn't sound too bad for that time if it was an entry level position. I started with a similar salary as a DevOps engineer in Munich at the end of 2019. Munich isn't cheap though, I pay 1,5k € in rent for a 54 sqm 2,5 room apartment in a good neighbourhood.
Hey ho, I am the maintainer of counter.dev. Hmm what you mean with release. It did got two times on the hacker news front page and there is a self hosting golang executable in a seperate but linked github repo as a github release.
What you mean with release :-) Le't see if I can do it.
> It’s what I love about HN. Sure, most of us wouldn’t mind being rich (sorry, ‘financially independent’), but it’s not the driver. The driver is to make something cool; to make something better.
Is this sarcasm? If it's genuine, I can think of many reasons. Either you are too young or wearing horse blinds or not living in the valley. Practically every start up is driven by a desire to be rich. This is why everyone sells to make millions at the first opportunity. They objectively have made the tech industry a worse place.
No. I’m a long way — physically — from ‘the valley’, and I’m certainly not young.
When I say ‘HN’ I mean the day to day discussion on this site. I know there’s VC and whatnot here but really, mostly, that’s not what I’m reading. Perhaps I subconsciously avoid it?
I’m reading people who are passionate about technology. I’m reading nerds who love a new thing. That’s what brings me back here day after day.
You are making judgement calls on people's personalities based on not very much. HN is a public website, the discussions can be good and genuine and we can all be the same narcissistic psychopaths that are only here to accumulate HN karma that for some reason we value higher than money.
Or we can all be dogs, it's the internet and you have no idea. I'd start taking online communities with a bigger grain of salt.
The startup industry is a great place for the people who are driven by money to prey on those that are idealistic, just like the game industry profits off of people who really like video games.
Hopefully now with more information available out there us workers can stand up more for ourselves and get more for the value of our labor and expertise!
I’m sorry, but no. Not anymore. Everything is run by being able to get money from VC investors, and to make money for them. It IS the main driver. Idealists learn pretty fast how their idealism won’t take them anywhere in Silicon Valley of 2023. Or they’re stupid or tone deaf enough to keep on going and thinking that their n-th to-do list app will change the world.
I’m afraid I gotta break it to you, but your romanticized idea of Silicon Valley is dead in the water.
And the people who are mainly motivated by money greatly appreciate the second group. I think in poker jargon they're called "marks" (less politely, suckers).
Still, as a neutral observer to this, their sacrifice is greatly appreciated!
> Mis-hiring a ton of people to only let lots of people go shows a untrustworthy dishonest shallow character.
How many people in HN do you think have moved out of gmail/google ? The answer is obvious - very few have. So, we have two theories:
* Either, most people don't think what you said is true.
* Alternately, people think what you think is true but don't care enough. This is like workers in china etc. This is just moral high standing. Expecting great character but not making a change oneself.
Absurd & bizarre connection you draw. Companies that wish to continue forever face rot. Sometimes it's from over-retaining. But usually IMO it's from under-valuing & under-attending to the people making the meat.
The impact won't show up in a quarter, or maybe even 4, but the hollowing out & disenfranchisement of your workforce has real impact, is what makes you a lumbering husk, that might not be in visible decline, but it does make you weak & fragile & with muted senses, makes you less attuned. The cost of being a shit adds up.
The best approach is to build a prototype and test the waters.