I love SonarQube (previously called SonarLint). I/We use it at work in dotnet/C# and web/Blazor projects.
Their free offer is great.
The dotnet and Visual Studio analyzer suggestions are already a great tool. Adding SonarQube on top, and recently I've added Roslynator Analyzers as well gives great free tooling, linting, suggestions of various levels, and quick actions to apply.
With the commercial backing they have, SonarQube is very well maintained/developed as well, with regular updates.
It's intended to become a spiritual successor to ThiefMD.
What does it want to or already do different or better than ThiefMD?
I see the release has a flatpak. A Windows binary or installer would be great too, attached to the release, so it doesn't require cargo toolchain and build to use.
Wait. Does it even support Windows? I guess not? I read Rust and GTK and assumed it would.
When I explore or consider alternatives, I don't think of or ask myself about design principles, but consider and weigh what could and would make sense where I am.
More than principles, the guiding goal is Maintainability - Readability, Graspability, Consistency, Correctness, Robustness. Weighted against constraints.
I guess separation of concerns is a big one I use implicitly. Like many others.
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.
I've become disillusioned. After projects did not respond, not even with timely hacktoberfest-accepted labels on PRs, I don't consider it likely the investment will be used in the projects or attributed to me during Hacktoberfest. The last two times I participated, finding projects was quite the hassle too.
I enjoyed the early years. I got shirts, which are my favorite shirts. Great fabric.
This could prevent the developer verification from coming to reality.
This is about the Epic Games court case regarding competing app stores and payment processors, not the Google developer registration requirement. A halt on previous rulings in the case was denied.
… requires Google to allow users to download rival app stores within its Play store and make Play's app catalog available to competitors. Those provisions do not take effect until July 2026.
… Google must allow developers to include external links in apps, enabling users to bypass Google's billing system. That part of the injunction is due to take effect later this month.
Interesting. I'm definitely missing a decent PDF editor.
Looks like they support a lot of PDF features, but not PDF 2.0 yet.
I was also interested in what underlying PDF library they are using. Looks like their own library is part of the project or if not, based on Qt if they provide anything.
The licensing is a bit confusing. The website talks about being LGPL, then about goal of being more permissive then GPL, but in the repository README, it talks about how the project was relicensed from LGPL to MIT, and license file is MIT. Seems like it was just the website intro missing an update. So: MIT.
In what way is this !programming@programming.dev? I don't think "I made this" should quality, or we would lose programming focus/scope of the community. This would be a better fit in gamedev or gaming or personal project communities.
The comment claimed "alternative to GitHub". I pointed out that it's an alternative for only a subset of use cases/projects. Without that clarification, someone may explore or follow through and be disappointed.
We leave it to individual tools to decide on exactly what small means. In particular, tools are free to use different definitions in different circumstances.
What does this mean?
What does Linus when he says rustfmtcheck? cargo fmt check? A util I can't find with a simple search? Maybe they have makefile targets or sth for it?
The concerns raised by Linus make sense to me, but should be simple to solve. The small items description already mentions variance, and the need for tools to decide. So shouldn't it be a simple configuration change?
Create and use projects you have an interest or use in for yourself
Reading technical articles
Reading guidance docs (like Microsoft dotnet or SQL Server docs giving introduction to architecture, systems, approaches, behaviors, design decisions, etc)
Working with more experienced people - seeing them work, being instructed, reviewed, commented, guided by them
Experiencing alternative technologies and approaches
Experience in general
Exploring existing projects and their architectures
I don't know how far along you are in Python use. In general, I don't think Python guides you into good practice or architecture. It's too dynamic and varied of a language. You'll need a framework to be guided. Personally, I have a dislike for it for multiple reasons. Others seem to like it. Other languages and ecosystems are more limited, in good ways. (Maybe I'm misinterpreting "todays" Python, I've only peeking experience with Python.)
I would suggest trying out Go or/and then C#. Both are relatively simple to get into, and have more native/mainline frameworks and guidance. C#/Dotnet in general has a lot of guidance, documentation in broad and specific, and tutorials and sample projects.
I don't think 2% of M365 is necessarily bad numbers. Office is prevalent, for all kinds of and even the simplest of office work. Not everyone needs AI or has the technical expertise or awareness of what this offer even means. Some people may not have launched their Office for one or two years but still have a paid license.
There's also a free copilot for GitHub users, which may be necessary as a teaser and testing, and adoption. That may also offset "adoption" by measure of commercial licenses instead of active users.
I didn't like the initial focus on that number of sold licenses in the article. Of course, they expand upon it and draw a broader picture afterwards.
I haven't found anything either. Seems like it was an event and they just now announced it there. So it makes sense that there may not be any project page or documentation yet. Which is unfortunate.
And when you search for it you see articles reporting about this with titles like "it's finally here!". So stupid. Misleading.
For reference, same article posted an hour earlier in this community. This post currently has more upvotes. Neither has comments, as of now.