• 7 Posts
  • 257 Comments
Joined 2 years ago
Cake day: August 9th, 2023
  • LemoineFaircloughtoOpen Source@lemmy.ml•Paradox of tolerance licenseEnglish
    1·
    23 days ago

    I think it’s important to consider that the GNU General Public License is really only a part of the Free Software Movement, which is “An effort by a group of people to achieve a social or political goal”. That movement is defined by a group of people and a goal and has “infrastructure”, such as “The Free Software Foundation” (“a 501(c)(3) non-profit organization”). “The idea of the Free Software Movement is that computer users deserve the freedom to form a community”, but if you want to accomplish a different goal, it might be useful to clearly communicate that goal to other people to create a different movement (and create new “infrastructure” to support your effort).

    Changing only a part of the GNU General Public License might make it incoherent or otherwise a hindrance to your goal in a way that you might not expect. It might be better to focus on talking with other people about a goal of yours, and you might discover that you can be most effective without investing any energy in creating a new license for software, but if you determine that creating a new license is important you can create a comprehensive design for one to match your efforts more closely.

    It seems that your goal might be summarized with “I want people to be able to help themselves (using software) without contributing to spreading hate” (“putting a motion in the positive is a rule in parliamentary procedures”).

    See also “Chesterton’s Lamp-Post” (a suggestion to only start to act when you actually know what you want the final result to be) and “Chesterton’s fence” (a suggestion to not change things when you don’t know what the final result will be) for some context about what an undesirable design/plan is.

  • LemoineFaircloughtoProgrammer Humor@lemmy.ml•CommitEnglish
    7·
    26 days ago

    Doesn’t git status tell you what to do?

    use “git add <file>…” to mark resolution

    use “git commit” to conclude merge

    I always use git status to check what is appropriate before doing anything else, since the right thing to do can sometimes be different, like after using git rebase when a break command was used vs when a squash command resulted in a conflict.

  • LemoineFaircloughtoMicroblog Memes@lemmy.world•Never OracleEnglish
    112·
    1 month ago

    If one copy of all of your data is deleted, you should be able to recover it.

    • Maintain three copies of your data: This includes the original data and at least two copies.
    • Use two different types of media for storage: Store your data on two distinct forms of media to enhance redundancy.
    • Keep at least one copy off-site: To ensure data safety, have one backup copy stored in an off-site location, separate from your primary data and on-site backups.

    https://www.veeam.com/blog/321-backup-rule.html

    Someone that was following best practices would have regularly made a copy of their data and stored it somewhere that doesn’t depend on anything Oracle does, since I’d consider depending on Oracle to store all of your data to be storing all your data at one site.