haha no source, just a dumb joke.

Japan: Checkmate

:: Reveals 10X more laws regulating game consoles ::

I know, I know, it’s pronounced “Nyïmp”

Full name is GNUIMP anyway

Removed by mod

Kevin

I don’t know what they call themselves, but the opposition is anal retentive.

Where’s all the “solar panels and batteries are just as bad as oil” people.

Tabs are a dark pattern confirmed.

The war is over, long live spaces.

I’m going to rename my NAS “online discussions” in your honor.

Unsolicited fact: Heinz picked the number 57 at random, it just sounded like good marketing at a time when things were general marketed as “tonic #4” and the like.

(well, maybe not fact, more like probable truth)

Distributed Honor-system Clothes Peg Server

not blonde, just old

…and I hope not, bleh.

A repo dedicated to non-unit-test tests would be the best way to go. No need to pollute your main code repo with orders of magnitude more code and junk than the actual application.

That said, from what I understand of the exploit, it could have been avoided by having packaging and testing run in different environments (I could be wrong here, I’ve only given the explanation a cursory look). The tests modified the code that got released. Tests rightly shouldn’t be constrained by other demands (like specific versions of libraries that may be shared between the test and build steps, for example), and the deploy/build step shouldn’t have to work around whatever side effects the tests might create. Containers are easy to spin up.

Keeping them separate helps. Sure, you could do folders on the same repo, but test repos are usually huge compared to code repos (in my experience) and it’s nicer to work with a repo that keeps its focus tight.

It’s comically dumb to assume all tests are equal and should absolutely live in the same repo as the code they test, when writing tests that function multiple codebases is trivial, necessary, and ubiquitous.

The worst part of it is most big companies are forcing RTO to either justify the leases they don’t want to pay to break, or to satisfy tax incentives agreements they made with municipalities.

In both cases, they’re deciding it’s better if you pay - in time, gas, car maintenance, mental health, productivity, and stress - for their business decisions that went bad instead of paying money out of their own bloated pockets.

I see a dark room of shady, hoody-wearing, code-projected-on-their-faces, typing-on-two-keyboards-at-once 90’s movie style hackers. The tables are littered with empty energy drink cans and empty pill bottles.

A man walks in. Smoking a thin cigarette, covered in tattoos and dressed in the flashiest interpretation of “Yakuza Gangster” imaginable, he grunts with disgust and mutters something in Japanese as he throws the cigarette to the floor, grinding it into the carpet with his thousand dollar shoes.

Flipping on the lights with an angry flourish, he yells at the room to gather for standup.

It’s not uncommon to keep example bad data around for regression to run against, and I imagine that’s not the only example in a compression library, but I’d definitely consider that a level of testing above unittests, and would not include it in the main repo. Tests that verify behavior at run time, either when interacting with the user, integrating with other software or services, or after being packaged, belong elsewhere. In summary, this is lazy.

Yes!

You? Nothing, you’re just being a good cog in a bad machine. Bossman? Rashes, but on the inside of their skin, but that’s likely compounded by numerous other crimes.

it’s ok, so are humans. Hopefully the geese win?