And we see similar problems with Ubuntu LTS, fwiw. LTS comes out every 2 years, and that's kind of ok-ish, but it lasts 5 years, which is nonsensical.
It was not, in the past. So what changed?
Unpopular opinion: CentOS switching to Stream is not a bad thing at all.
When you wanted to run Openstack on CentOS in 2015, you needed to enable https://t.co/paegQ99rAj to even begin an install. The first thing that did was literally replace every single package in the install.
And we see similar problems with Ubuntu LTS, fwiw. LTS comes out every 2 years, and that's kind of ok-ish, but it lasts 5 years, which is nonsensical.
It was not, in the past. So what changed?
We have been moving to a platform based development approach, leveraging the wins from DevOps.
"Kris, that's corporate bullshit."
It's not, though. Let me spell it out in plain for you.
They use Github or Gitlab, with many integrations, and a local IDE. They commit to a VCS (the VCS, it's spelled git), and trigger a bunch of things.
Starting a new programming language in 2020 is not as easy as it was in the past, because you do not only need a language, but also a JetBrains product, SonarQube support, gitlab-ci.yaml's…
We also have come to rely on tooling to enable collaboration, and structured discussion about code.
We use other, better mechanisms that UIDs for separation these days.
So your Wifi Control Plane system uses three Java processes and one Mongodb. Docker it into one container, or provide a helm chart or docker-compose with four for better scalability and maintenance.
Exactly. The actual distro does hardly matter at all, because your software comes packaged with all dependencies anyway, or is even built locally that way.
Independently. On a per-project basis.
And the project will bring its own database, cache, runtime and libraries with itself, without version conflicts, and without waiting for the distro to move or to provide at all.
They are finally free from slow moving OSS projects preventing them from upgrading local components because they can't keep up.
I say "Yay, finally, progress." 👍 ✔ 🎶 🕺
It's 2020. Act like it.
More from Trading
You May Also Like
Recently, the @CNIL issued a decision regarding the GDPR compliance of an unknown French adtech company named "Vectaury". It may seem like small fry, but the decision has potential wide-ranging impacts for Google, the IAB framework, and today's adtech. It's thread time! 👇
It's all in French, but if you're up for it you can read:
• Their blog post (lacks the most interesting details): https://t.co/PHkDcOT1hy
• Their high-level legal decision: https://t.co/hwpiEvjodt
• The full notification: https://t.co/QQB7rfynha
I've read it so you needn't!
Vectaury was collecting geolocation data in order to create profiles (eg. people who often go to this or that type of shop) so as to power ad targeting. They operate through embedded SDKs and ad bidding, making them invisible to users.
The @CNIL notes that profiling based off of geolocation presents particular risks since it reveals people's movements and habits. As risky, the processing requires consent — this will be the heart of their assessment.
Interesting point: they justify the decision in part because of how many people COULD be targeted in this way (rather than how many have — though they note that too). Because it's on a phone, and many have phones, it is considered large-scale processing no matter what.
It's all in French, but if you're up for it you can read:
• Their blog post (lacks the most interesting details): https://t.co/PHkDcOT1hy
• Their high-level legal decision: https://t.co/hwpiEvjodt
• The full notification: https://t.co/QQB7rfynha
I've read it so you needn't!
Vectaury was collecting geolocation data in order to create profiles (eg. people who often go to this or that type of shop) so as to power ad targeting. They operate through embedded SDKs and ad bidding, making them invisible to users.
The @CNIL notes that profiling based off of geolocation presents particular risks since it reveals people's movements and habits. As risky, the processing requires consent — this will be the heart of their assessment.
Interesting point: they justify the decision in part because of how many people COULD be targeted in this way (rather than how many have — though they note that too). Because it's on a phone, and many have phones, it is considered large-scale processing no matter what.
