Damn. You guys need to take back your country
Damn. You guys need to take back your country
Careful. Nintendo can sue you for that
Milk teeth in Norwegian as well, "melketenner"
I kind of with the sentiment. Review pre merge though, but only block the merge if there are serious faults. Otherwise, merge the code and have the author address issues after the merge. Get the value to production
Yeah, I see your point. Maybe my employers are different, it's never been an issue explaining why the ticket isn't closed just because the PR is merged
Just brain storming here:
You could expose a bare git repo on the server with a git hook that runs Docker compose up on push.
You could also have GitHub actions ssh in and run git pull && docker compose up on push to main.
Sorry about the confusion. It's not sarcasm. I'm just sick and tired of people blocking my PR because of an argument about wether the function should be called X or Y or Z or D
There's often features and bug fixes worth more than the ones introduced in the PR. I've yet to see bug free code just because it's went through review and QA.
I'm saying identify the bugs through review, and fix them. Just do it in a new PR unless they are critical
Vim, plain text files and syncthing. Best combo I've found after years of searching
The right to use adblockers? This is my device. I bought it. I have ownership. I decide what and who gets to run code on it. Write what you want in lawyerspeak in contracts designed to prevent me from reading and/or understanding it. You can't redefine ownership