NOTE: Your strategy should be supported using project management best-practices found within the Management Practices. These practices have been developed by industry, spending billions of dollars each year in projects. Of course, they would want their projects to succeed. Your quality of life is at least this important. Take your efforts seriously and manage your efforts.

Keeping bootstrap-sass in sync with upstream changes from Bootstrap used to be an error prone and time consuming manual process. With Bootstrap 3 we have introduced a converter that automates this.

The entire framework is based on small, clean Ruby structures that can be executed programmatically.

note that TRB source code modifications are not proprietary

The great thing about working with reinteractive is you get to work directly with the developers, which is a huge plus. As a technical founder, I find proxying through a project manager adds unnecessary layers of complexity and creates opportunity for human error.

I will continue to use form objects and push changes into the repo when I feel they are universally relevant and valuable.

I made this gem because I tried reform and I found some bugs. I started to contribute but there is some things I don't like in reform.

I apologize for the slow development of Reform after the "explosion" when I released it initially. The reason for this is I changed jobs and didn't use Reform (yet).

Now if you think about it, PJAX sounds a lot like Turbolinks. They both use JS to fetch server-rendered HTML and put it into the DOM. They both do caching and manage the forward and back buttons. It's almost as if the Rails team took a technique developed elsewhere and just rebranded it.

A Longform, Media-Rich Narrative

A Network Visualization:

A Gallery of Primary Sources: Making the History of 1989

👍 Upvote issue #204 if you want to see it land faster.

Deployment of Project Pages from /docs folder on main branch

Notions, Notes, Ideas and work notes

They can be linked to Ideas, Notes or Notions, or may give rise to them, but they serve a purpose firmly rooted in ongoing work. They are always placed within the context, and folder, of a specific project

Our team is building open source community tools and Svelte fits our identity as an independent labor of love with an organic community.

With some frameworks, you may find your needs at odds with the enterprise-level goals of a megacorp owner, and you may both benefit and sometimes suffer from their web-scale engineering. Svelte’s future does not depend on the continued delivery of business value to one company, and its direction is shaped in public by volunteers.

Better community building: At the moment, MDN content edits are published instantly, and then reverted if they are not suitable. This is really bad for community relations. With a PR model, we can review edits and provide feedback, actually having conversations with contributors, building relationships with them, and helping them learn.

I think the main difference between the two are the way API are served. Some smelte components need you to input big chunk of json as props, while i prefer keep props as primitive types and in the other hand give you different components tags to compose.

These are sequential because build:ssr imports the public/index.html that build:dom produces.

There are actually 3 other libraries that implements material in svelte, i hope this to become the community favorite because using MDC underneath it implements correctly Material guidelines.

@monkeythedev I am curious how do you "organize" your work - You forked https://github.com/hperrin/svelte-material-ui and https://github.com/hperrin/svelte-material-ui is not very active. Do you plan an independent project ? I hope the original author would return at some times, if not, i'll see

Since Typescript 3.0 this can be done with Project References.

The project organization is a bit weird because we have a mono-repository that contains projects and libraries. The projects are grouped by company and by browser / server / universal.

It is open to the community to help set its direction.

In Rust, we use the "No New Rationale" rule, which says that the decision to merge (or not merge) an RFC is based only on rationale that was presented and debated in public. This avoids accidents where the community feels blindsided by a decision.

I'd like to go with an RFC-based governance model (similar to Rust, Ember or Swift) that looks something like this: new features go through a public RFC that describes the motivation for the change, a detailed implementation description, a description on how to document or teach the change (for kpm, that would roughly be focused around how it affected the usual workflows), any drawbacks or alternatives, and any open questions that should be addressed before merging. the change is discussed until all of the relevant arguments have been debated and the arguments are starting to become repetitive (they "reach a steady state") the RFC goes into "final comment period", allowing people who weren't paying close attention to every proposal to have a chance to weigh in with new arguments. assuming no new arguments are presented, the RFC is merged by consensus of the core team and the feature is implemented. All changes, regardless of their source, go through this process, giving active community members who aren't on the core team an opportunity to participate directly in the future direction of the project. (both because of proposals they submit and ones from the core team that they contribute to)

In July 2010, Microsoft let go Jimmy Schementi, one of two remaining members of the IronRuby core team, and stopped funding the project.[19][20] In October 2010 Microsoft announced the Iron projects (IronRuby and IronPython) were being changed to "external" projects and enabling "community members to make contributions without Microsoft's involvement or sponsorship by a Microsoft employee".

If you are working in a large enterprise application, we have to create small components. Small components are much more flexible in terms of reusability and maintainability.

This conflicts in very basic ways with what other engineering disciplines expect. Toyota's stylists might be able to sell their renderings in art galleries, but you can't drive to work in one. In software, you can.

Project Euler

Industrialization: You can easily chop your form validations into smaller independent pieces that can be developed by separate teams in paralell with no dependencies.

But for big projects it should work out to just apply this techniques to certain sub-folders in your project where this problems occurs, as-if they are stand alone libraries.

I think Vue does a really good job comparing itself to other solutions out there.

When I say that my experience is that it means it's time to split up your components, I guess I mean that there tends to be a logical grouping between all the things that care about (for example) sqr_n, and in Svelte, logical groupings are expressed as components.

Since re-rendering in Svelte happens at a more granular level than the component, there is no artificial pressure to create smaller components than would be naturally desirable

npm install npm run dev

I'm suggesting there should be a way to write lifecycle related code that also responds to changing props, like how useEffect works. I think how React handles this could be a good source of inspiration.

I’d still be interested in Svelte making things easier so I’ve opened a feature request for Reactive statement cleanup functions.

Naptha, its current name, is drawn from an even more tenuous association. See, it comes from the fact that "highlighter" kind of sounds like "lighter", and that naptha is a type of fuel often used for lighters. It was in fact one of the earliest codenames of the project, and brought rise to a rather fun little easter egg which you can play with by quickly clicking about a dozen times over some block of text inside a picture.

I started Solid years ago before I thought anyone would be interested in using it. I only started promoting it because it had already achieved the goals I had set out for it.

both copied much of their API from Redux Form, so, despite working very differently under the hood, there is a lot of overlap in their APIs.

If you’ve used Flow before, the syntax is fairly similar. One difference is that we’ve added a few restrictions to avoid code that might appear ambiguous.

Many people recently are complaining about bundler performance. But I don’t think any tool is going to solve performance problems. Bundlers can try innovative ideas such as multi-threading and improved caching, but you’re always going to hit a limit. If you’re having performance problems, it’s more likely because you’re not keeping tabs of what you’re importing, and haven’t considered splitting your project into multiple projects.

Developing software is usually easier if you break your project into smaller separate pieces, since that often removes unexpected interactions and dramatically reduces the complexity of the problems you'll need to solve

For context, the previous API had a lazy promise. Currently I’m thinking we could just return a closure like in the React API

This is the same as useEffect in React, incidentally — the function must be synchronous in order to avoid race conditions.

The main rationale for this PR is that, in my hones opinion, Svelte needs a way to support style overrides in an intuitive and close to plain HTML/CSS way. What I regard as intuitive is: Looking at how customizing of styles is being done when applying a typical CSS component framework, and making that possible with Svelte.

Does it look like a decorator plugin in Ractive, right

The more I think about this, the more I think that maybe React already has the right solution to this particular issue, and we're tying ourselves in knots trying to avoid unnecessary re-rendering. Basically, this JSX... <Foo {...a} b={1} {...c} d={2}/> ...translates to this JS: React.createElement(Foo, _extends({}, a, { b: 1 }, c, { d: 2 })); If we did the same thing (i.e. bail out of the optimisation allowed by knowing the attribute names ahead of time), our lives would get a lot simpler, and the performance characteristics would be pretty similar in all but somewhat contrived scenarios, I think. (It'll still be faster than React, anyway!)

It’s become increasingly common to divide code into components, rather than by file type. React, for example, allows for the collocation of a components markup and JavaScript. In Svelte, this is taken one logical step further: the Javascript, markup and styling for a component can all exist together in a single `.svelte`​ file

we assessed the learner-centeredness of 109 syllabi sampled from Project Syllabus

This will enable Material-UI to stay relevant in the long term.

For a non-monorepo package you can simply point directly to the Github repo. This case is similar, but you want to scope it just to a single package within the repo. For those that make monorepos they don't necessarily need this feature. It's for those that use projects that use monorepos. Telling them to not organize their projects into monorepos doesn't help people who make use of these projects.

If npm installs a git repo, it assumes that the git repo is the package. I don't really know how we could specify a sub-path easily, since all parts of the git url are already used for other things.

This is more a rhetoric question as this seems to be quite hard ;-) There is a long discussion about installing a subfolder of a repository and monorepos in general at the NPM Github issues (yarn misses this feature, too). The thing is that this makes it quite hard to report issues of your project as one can't test the current master easily. Do you recommend a way how to use the latest Github version?

Middle School Project: Public Art

This process involves the following five phases:

Problem is, everyone's busy, so it can be days or even weeks before even a small PR is merged. So I'm stashing my stuff here as I write it. I'll still try to keep the PRs in motion, to gradually get some of this merged.

This file that really does nothing but manage other project files is often called a “solution” in some environments.

The folks at Netlify created Netlify CMS to fill a gap in the static site generation pipeline. There were some great proprietary headless CMS options, but no real contenders that were open source and extensible—that could turn into a community-built ecosystem like WordPress or Drupal. For that reason, Netlify CMS is made to be community-driven, and has never been locked to the Netlify platform (despite the name).

Becouse of CanCan, StateMachine and others I deside to create OpenSource organization to maintain gems. People disappear, lose their passion about coding, get new interests, families, children. But if us many we can support gems much longer. I dont pretend to be an expierenced ruby developer, but I can do administarative work: managing teams, members, approve simple pool-requests. If you think it good idea and want to support some inactive gems, not life time, maybe just a little - welcome to organization.

There's actually discussion among the rubygems team about a process for putting gems "up for adoption" that you might be interested in: http://www.benjaminfleischer.com/2014/08/17/rubygems-adoption-center/

in order to track the always-improving upstream project, we continuously rebase our patches on top of the upstream master

Our hope is that once a formal specification for these extensions is settled, this patchset can be used as a base to upstream the changes in the original project.