Beowulf

Public Key

npub16tr4x3tnmxrumfc7u6cnfvjqufxftc0qg3xz0v4n3qj49hdennnq2n5d24

NIP-05 Address

Profile Code

nprofile1qqsd936ng4eanp7d5u0wdvf5kfqwyny4u8sygnp8k2ecsf2jmkueeespz3mhxue69uhhyetvv9ujuerpd46hxtnfduqs6amnwvaz7tmwdaejumr0dss5nqzr

Publishing to

relay.primal.net

Author Public Key

npub16tr4x3tnmxrumfc7u6cnfvjqufxftc0qg3xz0v4n3qj49hdennnq2n5d24

Show more details

Last Notes

2025-10-02 20:26:22 CEST

- reply

Why?

2025-09-10 17:54:04 CEST

- reply

This depends on your reverse proxy. Nginx e.g. needs to be restarted (down time).
This is a more manual process.
Just this doesn't provide HA.
Have you ever used K8s? And just to say it: if no one would need it, it wouldn't exist...

2025-09-10 17:46:31 CEST

- reply

Name a good solution?

2025-09-10 17:44:23 CEST

- reply

or you need HA and zero down time upgrades 🤷

2025-09-10 17:40:59 CEST

- reply

nobody is wrong, but it depends on the use case. It is not a solution for every use case or every user. The same as for the most technologies...

2025-09-09 18:41:31 CEST

- reply

Naja, anrechnen geht schon, nur komplizierter 🙃

2025-09-09 18:27:51 CEST

- reply

Wir hatten im Pribzip jedes Semester 6 Module à 5 ECTS alsi 30 ECTS pro Semester

2025-09-09 18:23:24 CEST

- reply

Eigentlich alle Module 5, im Bachelor hatte ich zwei die 2,5 gaben und eins was 10 gab, dass war aber im Prinzip zwei Module in einem.

2025-08-21 10:30:53 CEST

- reply

Ok, so you "temporarly" merge the feature branch in the CI?<li>Never saw this in the real world...</li><li>How does this work with merge conflicts? Most of the merge requests I see at work have merge conflicts. The CI wouldn't be able to fix them. And if you now pull main into your branch, we have the same situation as above, so why not just always do that?</li>

2025-08-21 10:25:37 CEST

- reply

If I run the CI against the latest commit of the feature branch it is not guranteed that changes in main not in your branch will break the code?
Or I don't understand what you mean.

2025-08-21 10:21:30 CEST

- reply

Ok, then not rebasing, instead merge main into the feature branch.
If I run the CI against the merged result (feature in main) it is too late for such issues. Then main is already broken...

2025-08-21 10:02:07 CEST

- reply

I also think it would be the responsibility of the person who want to merge their stuff. If it is a rebase or merge is unrelated
Why?
I experienced way too often that a feature branch worked perfectly fine, tests were successful etc. Then it is merged in main and there was a change in some code which the feature branch uses etc and it breaks.
To prevent this, get the branch to the latest state before merging, build it and run tests. Afterwards merge it.
Otherwise I don't know a better way to prevent breakage on main.

2025-08-21 09:58:00 CEST

- reply

Ah, thats what you meant. I misunderstood it then. I thought you don't like when the feature branch is rebased onto main before the merge and afterwards merged (e.g. with a merge commit).

2025-08-21 09:46:10 CEST

- reply

What do you hate about it?
You don't like that a feature branch is rebased on main before merge?

2025-07-29 11:41:09 CEST

- reply

Der Kollege meinte dann auch nur: Wie dir ging es noch so? Warum reagierst du dann! Das kann warten.
Aber ich wollte auch nicht nur im Bett liegen und vor mich hin vegetieren... 😞

2025-07-29 11:32:51 CEST

- reply

Lag mit 40°C Fieber im Bett, hatte dann gerade 39,5 oder so und dann hat ein Kollege geschrieben, dass es Crashes gibt - ich dachte mir jo, aktuell gehts ja, ich schaue mal. Das Fieber war dann schneller wieder bei 40°C als ich den Bug finden konnte :D

2025-07-24 14:17:02 CEST

- reply

wer oder was ist Paul?

2025-07-24 14:13:17 CEST

- reply

Es gibt ein Sitzplan bei euch? 👀