We’re bringing a social experience to Anytype by making spaces more interactive. We start with the concept of one space = one group = one chat. Then we’ll expand to include discussions on objects, enabling forum-like use cases. It will significantly improve collaborative use cases. You’ll chat and discuss your pages and files in the same end-to-end encrypted and local-first way.

Koha Library Software The world's first free and open source library system

Most complex software ships with a few bugs. Obviously, we want to avoid them, but the more complex a feature is, the harder it is to cover all the use-cases. As we get closer to our RC date, do we feel confident that what we're shipping has as few blocking bugs as possible? I would like to say we're close, but the truth is I have no idea. It feels like we'll have to keep trying the features for a bit until we don't run into anything - but we have less than 3 weeks before the RC ships. Here's a few surprising bugs that need to get fixed before I would feel comfortable shipping node12 in stable.

Deciding between AI vs traditional software isn’t easy. Businesses struggle to decide between reliability and innovation. Do you stick with proven, rule-based systems or invest in adaptive, data-driven AI? This blog breaks down the differences, advantages, and use cases so you can make the right choice for your business.

One pattern that I love to use in my SvelteKit projects is returning writable stores from the layout’s load function. This makes it possible to fetch data from the server (for example the user object for the logged in user), and then you make this object available as a writable reactive store throughout the whole application. So when the user updates their username or avatar, you do the PUT request to the server and you get the updated user object back from the server as the response, you can simply update the $user writable store value and every place in your app where you show the user object gets updated immediately.

Another limitation in this implementation is that passing other options in the shebang to vite-node won't work, as I expect exact indexes in order to figure out what are the arguments to forward. It's not perfect but I think it's good enough to unblock people like me as a start. 👍

los documentos como aspectos separados y encerrados de nuestra experiencia de cómputo

los documentos como aspectos separados y encerrados de nuestra experiencia de cómputo

los documentos como aspectos separados y encerrados de nuestra experiencia de cómputo

Many in Silicon Valley believe we're less than a year away from AI that can automate most software engineering work

Vite's job is to get your source modules into a form that can run in the browser as fast as possible. To that end, we recommend separating static analysis checks from Vite's transform pipeline.

Vite uses esbuild to transpile TypeScript into JavaScript which is about 20~30x faster than vanilla tsc, and HMR updates can reflect in the browser in under 50ms.

Above: the time to do a production bundle

However, I also feel that Ruby sometimes seems too focused on being backwards compatible, to a point where it risk hurting the ecosystem. I think this thread is a good example, because it seems like such a small and benign change, yet it's taken several years and lots of back and forth, and in the end the proposed change wasn't even applied(!?).

With its "no downstream hacks" and "upstream first" approach, it acts as a cutting-edge catalyst to push open-source technologies we love forward.

Sectigo Code Signing Certificates at $219.99

Simply choosing a more efficient programming language speeds up this calculation

but once I got some momentum there, I switched to Krita and never looked back. Looking back I’d just skip Corel and start with Krita

Why is more important than how

Everything is a trade-off

Software architecture choices include specific structural options from possibilities in the design of the software.

The software design model can be compared to an architected plan for a house. High-level plans represent the totality of the house (e.g., a three-dimensional rendering of the house). Lower-level plans provide guidance for constructing each detail (e.g., the plumbing lay). Similarly, the software design model provides a variety of views of the proposed software solution.

including both high-level software architecture and low-level component and algorithm design.

The first one is about using the code artefacts (classes, variables, modules, …) names to convey both domain and architectural meaning.

“[…] an architecturally evident coding style that lets you drop hints to code readers so that they can correctly infer the design.”

Another problem is that now your business logic is obfuscated inside the ORM layer. If you look at the structure of the source code of a typical Rails application, all you see are these nice MVC buckets. They may reveal the domain models of the application, but you can’t see the Use Cases of the system, what it’s actually meant to do.

We are destroying software mistaking it for a purely engineering discipline.

AI systems gather and examine enormous volumes of data, a large portion of which may contain private or sensitive material. There is a chance of abuse or illegal access in the absence of stringent rules and protections. Gaining public trust requires transparency related to data usage with strong security measures in place.

Achieve seamless interoperability with CMARIX’s third-party system integration services. Whether it’s integrating banking APIs or external financial platforms, we ensure your systems communicate effectively, offering a unified and efficient banking experience.

Open source technology, now responsible for 80% of all used software

Make a list of all the documents that your business needs to handle ranging from proposals and quotations, contracts, worksheets, invoices, bills, and many others. You need to create all these documents through the software besides uploading your existing documents. Now, create these document types that can be created digitally by using the software.

There is a tremendous power in thinking about everything as a single kind of thing, because then you don’t have to juggle lots of different ideas about different kinds of things; you can just think about your problem.

Free software means that the users have the freedom to run, edit, contribute to, and share the software

We can't compete with Apple, we can't compete with Google, directly, in the field of resources. What we can eventually do is head count and heart count. We can compete on the ground of ideology because ours is better.

Arbib and Seba explain this by categorising human civilisation into two fundamentally intertwined complexes: the production system, encompassing all the foundational systems by which we meet fundamental material needs across energy, transport, food and materials (corresponding to ‘hardware’); and the organising system, encompassing how the former systems are governed, regulated and managed by society through economic, political, military, cultural and ideological structures and values (corresponding to ‘software’)

The ‘hardware’ is a configuration of matter which harnesses energy from its environment with surprising efficiency and dissipates it as waste back into the environment.

If one profiles what is going on in this whole process, it becomes clear that I/O dominates. Of the cpucycles expended, most go into conversion to and from intermediate file formats.

Built in the open Concourse's RFC process and governance model invite anyone to become a contributor, developing the project roadmap by collaborating in the open.

GPL "infects" other parts of a system to combat a work-around which was used to violate the software freedom of the user, by firewalling sections of GPL'ed code from the rest of the system.

The point of GPL licenses is to protect the user of the software, not the developer. If you want "protection" as a developer, use MIT (disclaimer of warranty). GPL "infects" other parts of a system to combat a work-around which was used to violate the software freedom of the user, by firewalling sections of GPL'ed code from the rest of the system. If you don't care about your users' software freedom in the first place, then (L)GPL is the wrong choice.

A free program allows you to tinker with it to make it do what you want (or cease to do something you dislike). Tinkering with software may sound ridiculous if you are accustomed to proprietary software as a sealed box, but in the Free World it's a common thing to do, and a good way to learn programming. Even the traditional American pastime of tinkering with cars is obstructed because cars now contain nonfree software.

If any of them is missing or inadequate, the program is proprietary (nonfree)

With all four freedoms, the users fully control the program.

With the other two freedoms, any group of users can together exercise collective control over the program.

Users' control over the program requires four essential freedoms.

freedom to study the program's “source code,” and change it, so the program does your computing as you wish

freedom to run the program as you wish, for whatever purpose.

The first two freedoms mean each user can exercise individual control over the program

Either way, they give the program's developer power over the users, power that no one should have.

When a program respects users' freedom and community, we call it “free software.”

computer users' freedom—for users to control the software they use, rather than vice versa

The computer will run, without prejudice, whatever software you install in it, and let that software do whatever its code says to do.

However, the presence of nonfree software in the computer is an obstacle to verifying that the computer is loyal, or making sure it remains so.

For instance, the AMT functionality in recent Intel processors runs nonfree software that can talk to Intel remotely. Unless disabled, this makes the system disloyal.

Free/Open Licenses Non-free Licenses

I can firmly recommend runit if you want a server-focused, reliable init system based on the traditional Unix philosophy.

Developers want to improve their project. If you find an issue, bring it up. If it's a valid concern, the author will probably want to have it fixed. In many cases, the author will consider it a valid issue, but simply not have the personal time or need to address it immediately. This is where open-source is great. Just fork the project and fix it

Rails' observers were partly inspired by aspect-oriented programming -- they're about cross-cutting concerns. If you're putting business logic in observers that is tightly coupled to the models they're observing, you're doing it wrong IMO.

We consider March 20 1998 to be curl's birthday.

lease administration software

Shopping Mall Management Software

This can be incredibly frustrating for developers. In my own experience, the person in the worst position is the developer brought in to clean up another developer’s mess. It’s now your responsibility not only to convince management that they need to slow down to give you time to fix things (which will stall sales), but also to architect everything, orchestrate the rollout, and coordinate with sales goals and marketing. Oh, and let’s not forget actually producing the code to resolve the underlying issues. It can, at times, be an insurmountable problem. A developer in that situation has to wear a lot of hats. They need to be:● An advocate to management and by extension the C-suite.● A project manager.● A marketer to understand the features and desired functionality both now and down the road, to make selling the product more simple with defined pipelines and marketable features.● A decision maker, willing to make tough calls with regards to future compatibility of the services, how they interact, and what third-party tools they might need to integrate with to ensure the rectified code will be usable for the foreseeable future.Last but not least, they need to be a good developer to fix the mess. If you employ a developer who can manage all those responsibilities as well as their day job, I guarantee you aren’t paying them enough, or they’re already looking somewhere else.

As web development is something I'm passionate about, having a server like Falcon is empowering.

If a problem is shared by only a handful of people, it's probably not worth programming a solution. Great Programmers Solve Important Problems The best programmers aren't simply the ones that write the best solutions: they're the ones that solve the best problems. The best programmers write kernels that allow billions of people to run other software, write highly reliable code that puts astronauts into space, write crawlers and indexers that organize the world's information. They make the right choices not only about how to solve a problem, but what problem to solve.

This is the most simulative version of a controller. It will try and mimic real user behaviour. It's the recommended version to use when the goal of the load-test is finding out how many concurrently active users the target instance supports.

I'm often asked to describe the “advantages” of free software. But the word “advantages” is too weak when it comes to freedom. Life without freedom is oppression, and that applies to computing as well as every other activity in our lives.

A proprietary program puts its developer or owner in a position of power over its users. This power is in itself an injustice.

System mapping software

property management Software

The problem is not about Open Source or Free Software. The problem is everything else.

We should also insist that every piece of technology is, by essence, political. That you cannot understand technology without understanding the people. And you cannot understand people without understanding politics. Every choice you made has an impact on the world.

It is not by accident that those distributions care a lot about the license of the software they distribute.

free software is provided, "without liability". That rule should be enforced.

When publicly distributed, the open-source code is hidden behind layers of indirection bypassing any packaging/integration effort, relying instead on virtualisation and downloading dependencies on the fly. Thanks to those strategies, corporations could benefit from open source code without any consequence. The open source code is, anyway, mostly hosted and developed on proprietary platforms.

More than 95% of people could be using a computer from 2008 or before without any problems. Needing a recent machine is limited to people who: Do extreme, professional, processor-intensive video-rendering. Compile massive programs and operating systems with severe time constraints. Play recent triple AAA video-games on high settings. Use many massive Electron apps and other inexcusably bad software written by soydevs and other people who shouldn't be writing software.

On-Demand Food Delivery App Solution

we shouldnt build anything new, we should try to make compatible the mindsets and tools that we already have

I want RSpec Rails development to be fast, and lightweight, much like it was when I joined the RSpec project.

As of right now the full build takes over an hour to run, and this makes cycling for PRs and quick iterative development very difficult.