And it's so popular! It must be good!

This reads like such diffuse nothing-speak. "We will do less but remain committed." It's a contradiction. Doesn't help that one person gives a speech then the company makes clarifications which read like pulling back or lying/delaying about where leadership is pushing towards.

The article does a decent job exploring what it could mean.

Neither closed core nor malicious runtime-platform switches are in the spirit of open source, or can be called truly or fully open source.

They should have made a concrete plan first, and then announced and implemented that. But I guess we can be thankful we can see signs of where they may be headed, and that could push negative feedback or make people more cautious and aware of their practices and changes.

Was there ever a reason to use OpenOffice after LibreOffice split off?

• 44% Male/Masculine
• 39% No information
• 18% Female/Feminine

Tech bias even on public domain open contribution datasets. Apparently could use more female contributors.

Roman @rtsisyk revoked Github owner permissions from Alexander @biodranik and Viktor @vng and granted such permissions to the community contributor @pastk. This triggered Github's automatic "sanctions" check and the whole Github OM organization was automatically archived and admin access was blocked until OM's appeal was reviewed. It was unknown whether and when Github would review Organic Maps' appeal and unblock the repositories, so 2 weeks later the project migrated to the self-hosted git.omaps.dev/organicmaps instance, using the free and open source software forge Forgejo.

What the fuck? GitHub blocking the account because of automated security evaluation triggering (probably a good thing) but no review over two weeks (obviously a very bad thing)?

I think they were always on a smaller scale. With this one, I'm somewhat hopeful that it'll stick, and be a long term effort.

committee consisting of representatives of Germany’s federal government and the state governments

Very interesting. A trove of experience and practical knowledge.

They were able to anticipate most of the loss scenarios in advance because they saw that logical arguments were not prevailing; when that happens, ""there's only one explanation and that's an alternative motive"". His ""number one recommendation"" is to ensure, even before the project gets started, that it has the right champion and backing inside the agency or organization; that is the real determiner for whether a project will succeed or fail.

Not very surprising, but still tragic and sad.

You always forget regex syntax?

I've always found it simple to understand and remember. Even over many years and decades, I've never had issues reading or writing simple regex syntax (excluding the flags and shorthands) even after long regex breaks.

I always pronounced it engine-x (fluent as one word) but never thought of it meaning engine lol

n gin x -> en gin ex -> "enginex" spoken, nginx thought

There are two very distinct ways of developing software:

I read this as a claim that there is only two. Which seems to match the overall flow of the document, describing only two, and then arguing between those two as if only those two exist.

No, that's wrong. Especially those two bleak, described extremes. They're not the only ways to develop software.

The thing is, most humans are laughably bad at architecting software without actually writing it first. […] Agile development "fixes" this. You get to discover your spec on your user's time and end up releasing faster. In the end (and oddly so if this were the 90s), fast food is indeed faster to make. But is it worth it?

What the heck are they even talking about anymore. Now one is the only feasible one. But then neither are.

Now, by the end, I have no idea what this was even trying to argue. Meant as entertainment, following two theoretical development process extremes? Formulating in the extreme to make a point? None of it seems to apply. No conclusion is made at the end, instead falling further into anecdotes and unrelated, far away equivalences that make the whole thing even more confusing.

each function has its own independent metal toggle switch

one steering wheel to steer left, and one to steer to the right

I'm not in (or into) the JS ecosystem. I'm glad I didn't have to dive into that at work yet. But I've used deno and bun in the past to evade installing NodeJS.

Just now I used deno v2 to build a static website I contributed a fix to, and it worked. I'm very glad to see I don't have to juggle different npm alternatives or be stuck without when I want to contribute but definitely do not want to install NodeJS.

The deno install was hilariously slow downloading and installing the JS libs into the node_modules folder. 150 MB of JS source code. For a simple static website generator.

Comparing it to the hugo.exe binary (go, single binary static website generator): That one is 80 MB. Not having to juggle many files makes it a lot faster and compact of course.

The deno.exe is 107 MB. Which is a chunky size; but man it provides a lot. When you contrast that to the node_modules folder… lol

The announcement also mentions and links to JSR for TypeScript module publishing platform, also with backwards compatibility and automatic stuff generating. Which also seems like a good effort.