Be bold and make changes. Document what you find out, what is outdated, what is missing.

Take ownership. If there's nobody that oversees overall structure, be the one to do so - at least where you're touching it or are being bothered by it.

Diatraxis gives some great insight and considerations input into writing and structuring documentation. Namely how different target audiences and doc use cases require different forms and detail levels of guidance.

My company's internal doc/guidance also links to https://www.writethedocs.org/guide/ which seems like a good source.

The server sidebar has an uptime stat. Could also have a simple monthly costs covered percent stat.

I wish standards were always open access. Not behind a 600 dollar paywall.

When it is paywalled I'm irritated it's even called a standard.

make bare got repositories

got it

Time to migrate to Funnertoo

The only issue they mention is browser page text search not working on rendered file view (blame).

The feels legacy conclusion doesn't make any sense to me.

GitHub is not the only platform implementing virtual scrolling, partial rendering of rendered files. There's a reason they do that: Files can get big, and adding various code highlighting and interactivity costs performance. It's not a local code representation and rendered canvas. It's rendered into a DOM and DOM representation, with markup and attached logic. Which at some point quickly becomes very inefficient or costly.

Not being able to use the browser text search is an unfortunate side effect.

I consider it a worsening modernization/feature addition. That's the opposite of legacy. We're moving forward (in a bad way), not stagnating.

When I click Blame, and then press Ctrl+F, it opens not my browser text search but the in-page in-file search. It works for me. (Not that I always use that search or like it.)

It's a systematic multi-layered problem.

The simplest, least effort thing that could have prevented the scale of issues is not automatically installing updates, but waiting four days and triggering it afterwards if no issues.

Automatically forwarding updates is also forwarding risk. The higher the impact area, the more worth it safe-guards are.

Testing/Staging or partial successive rollouts could have also mitigated a large number of issues, but requires more investment.

Exclusive: Google-backed software developer GitLab explores sale

Wth is that headline?

GitLab is a software developer?

GitLab, which has a market value of about $8 billion, is working with investment bankers on a sale process that has attracted interest from peers, including cloud monitoring firm Datadog, opens new tab, the sources said.

I'm surprised. They've always had visions, and paid plans, and pushed a specific vision of their product.

Transcript:

20 years ago, I was advocating for JavaScript. My story was that JavaScript is a much better language than anybody knows and that if we use it properly we can do amazing things about it and it can change the world and in fact, that happened.

But now my evangel is that we should stop using JavaScript. That it has so many congenital defects it really is a smelly language. There's just a lot of crap in it.

And it's still maybe for its field of application the best language in the world for doing that kind of stuff but that's not good enough. We should be moving on to the next generation of languages.

It used to be that we'd get new computer languages about every generation. I started with Fortran and then C and C++ and Java and JavaScript and so on and then it kind of stopped. There are still people developing languages but nobody cares. One person can make a programming language, a really good one, but you can't get adoption for it.

There are lots of terrible mistakes in the way that the web works, in the way our operating systems work, and we can't get new ones. We're just stuck with this crap and they keep piling new features on everything and the new features always create new problems and it doesn't have to be like that. We could be using really clean operating systems with really clean languages and really clean runtimes and doing all this stuff in a much more reliable way. But we don't seem to want to do that.

I've done JavaScript for a generation. It's time for the next thing. And I don't think that should be considered a radical point of view. I think it should be a normal evolutionary view.

I bolded main points

Commenter on Reddit (OP there) gives a talk link and summarization:

In the talk, Lars mentions that they often rely on self-reported anonymous data. But in this case, Google is large enough that teams have developed similar systems and/or literally re-written things, and so this claim comes from analyzing projects before and after these re-writes, so you’re comparing like teams and like projects. Timestamped: https://youtu.be/6mZRWFQRvmw?t=27012

Some additional context on these two specific claims:

Google found that porting Go to Rust "it takes about the same sized team about the same time to build it, so that's no loss of productivity" and "we do see some benefits from it, we see reduced memory usage [...] and we also see a decreased defect rate over time"

On re-writing C++ into Rust: "in every case, we've seen a decrease by more than 2x in the amount of effort required to both build the services written in Rust, as well as maintain and update those services. [...] C++ is very expensive for us to maintain."

I see, TIL. That's different from Germany, where Ingenieur is a protected term.

Driving a train is engineering?