Kissaki

Looks like it's not live yet?

https://github.com/jenkins-infra/docs.jenkins.io says "in development", and https://github.com/biru-codeastromer/docs.jenkins.io-vite.js-site links to a netlify url.

Challanges…: … Personal Resilience: Overcoming … hardware failures

ouch - I suspect it was personal hardware? probably not infrastructure?

That's a very one-dimensional view of technical debt.

I was about to write something more, but I think if I don't know what they refer to when they say "knowledge", then it's too wishy-washy and I may be talking about something different than they intended.

Contrasting “resolving technical debt” and “investing [improvement] knowledge” we're moving the reference view point.

I document state and issues as technical debt, and opportunities for change as opportunities. They cross, but are distinct concepts, and do not always cross. Some technical debt may be documented without a documented opportunity. Opportunities may be open improvements that do not tackle technical debt.

In my eyes, technical debt is about burdens that reduce maintainability where better alternatives likely exist.

"Investing knowledge" is something different, and not necessarily about known burdens, but may be improvements unrelated to known burdens.

The good news: we’re learning. The industry is rediscovering the platform.

They mention examples of such frameworks and technologies; listing them and adding hyperlinks: HTMX, Qwik, Astro, Remix, SvelteKit

I've known HTMLX, which I wanted to make use of and try out for a while now. Remix looks interesting [to me] too.

A very good (historic) overview and assessment.

👀

I would agree, but when I look at it then

They wrote

Feel free to fork the project under a

(yes, the sentence ends with the 'a')

The ZUDoom GitHub project description says

UZDoom is a feature centric port for all Doom engine games, based on ZDoom, adding an advanced renderer, powerful scripting capabilities, and forked under a

It ending with 'forked under a' is probably a reference to that comment? lol, nice reference joke, but I hope they change it after a while, because as a description it's quite confusing.

Great comment on there links two code comment threads I found significant and interesting.

While it was primarily about ethics, it should also be noted that the code was described as being "impressively wrong", as well as not actually compiling. I mean, it basically checked if a theme was dark by if it had the word "dark" in the name - which is not a good heuristic - when better ways of doing it exist.

For reference, same article posted an hour earlier in this community. This post currently has more upvotes. Neither has comments, as of now.

I love SonarQube (previously called SonarLint). I/We use it at work in dotnet/C# and web/Blazor projects.

Their free offer is great.

The dotnet and Visual Studio analyzer suggestions are already a great tool. Adding SonarQube on top, and recently I've added Roslynator Analyzers as well gives great free tooling, linting, suggestions of various levels, and quick actions to apply.

With the commercial backing they have, SonarQube is very well maintained/developed as well, with regular updates.

My experience seems to be the opposite from yours. On every point you listed.

CSS has certainly grown into something with a historic legacy and backwards compatibility and stability directly contributes to a more mixed implementation than clean, streamlined and clear approach, but that's a consequence of combining evolution and backwards compatibility.

I haven't seen a better alternative yet, for web or other UI development approaches.

I like CSS quite a lot. Even if not all of it.