StudioLE

joined 2 years ago
[–] StudioLE@programming.dev 9 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

I think this might be what you're after

UI Improvements

Added a 'Delete all but latest' option for each campaign, so you can regain a little storage space wiggle room.

[–] StudioLE@programming.dev -4 points 2 years ago (8 children)

I never understand apps like this. Surely if you're looking for this level of feature you may as well just use a GUI?

[–] StudioLE@programming.dev 4 points 2 years ago (2 children)

That's usually the case but with this and the Rwanda proposal I think they're doing it because their voters enjoy the optics and indignity of migrants being treated as sub human.

[–] StudioLE@programming.dev 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)
[–] StudioLE@programming.dev 0 points 2 years ago

It's fine. The cost of compensating victims is less than fixing the issue so yeah it's safe.

[–] StudioLE@programming.dev 6 points 2 years ago

I used to see this a lot with Facebook. Every time they altered the design people would kick up a fuss and I never understood why, the new design always looked far better.

Nowadays of course I don't use Facebook but will occasionally have to sign in to look up the details of a business or something. The design has of course changed and I can't find a damn thing on it. So I'm finally on board with the masses.

[–] StudioLE@programming.dev 5 points 2 years ago

But they aren't getting forced to change accounts. Their service continues just under another provider.

[–] StudioLE@programming.dev 48 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (16 children)

People who use the default email their ISP gives them don't like change. The new service will probably have a different login screen and that's going to upset aunty Ethel and uncle ron. And then a different colour background. It's the worst thing that anyone could ever do to them

[–] StudioLE@programming.dev 2 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

I'll occasionally

  1. stash my changes
  2. unstash them.
  3. Revise the file in my editor so only the chunk I want to commit is present
  4. Commit
  5. Unstash the changes again to get back the uncommitted change

It's clunky but it's robust and safe. It does sound a lot cleaner to just use commit -p though

[–] StudioLE@programming.dev 2 points 2 years ago (3 children)

-p --patch

Interactively choose hunks of patch between the index and the work tree and add them to the index. This gives the user a chance to review the difference before adding modified contents to the index.

This effectively runs add --interactive, but bypasses the initial command menu and directly jumps to the patch subcommand. See “Interactive mode” for details.

The documentation is entirely meaningless? What does it do?

[–] StudioLE@programming.dev 1 points 2 years ago (10 children)

You've never used a graphical git client?!

I'm comfortable on the command line but a decent git UI is a way better experience.

git diff is so basic using a GUI makes it far easier to compare changes.

Same for merge conflicts. I'm not sure you can even resolve them on the CLI?

Any form of rebase: I think I used the CLI to do an interactive rebase a few times in the early days but I'd never do so without a GUI now.

Managing branches: perhaps I'm a little too ott but I keep a lot of branches preserved locally, a GUI provides a decent tree structure for them whereas I assume on the command line I'd just get a long list.

Managing stashes: unless you just want to apply latest stash (which admittedly is almost always the case) then I'd much rather check what I'm applying through a GUI first.

There are some things I still use the CLI for though:

git remote add git remote set-url because I'm just too lazy to figure out how to do that in a GUI. It's usually hidden away somewhere.

git push --force because every GUI makes it such an effort. C'mon! I know what I'm doing - it's /probably/ not going to mess things up...

[–] StudioLE@programming.dev 39 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (9 children)

Star rating systems don't accurately convey opinions. The majority of reviews will be either 5* or 1* with only a few wannabe critics voting in between applying their own arbitrary votes.

If Amazon are going to change things then why not adopt something more meaningful. Simple up/down votes for things that actually matter.

Was this product as described: 👍/👎

Are you satisfied with the quality: 👍/👎

Are you satisfied with the value for money: 👍/👎

Then a few optional questions for things that aren't relevant to the product such as postage/packaging etc.

view more: ‹ prev next ›