The launch video for this new Framework Laptop 16 mentioned firmware improvements to disable wake on keypress when the laptop's screen is closed, specifically to prevent the type of situation you mentioned. I've personally experienced similar issues with an XPS 15 in the past; I'm hopeful this type of change will help.
> Forgejo PR managed to twist that good announcement into seeming as a conflict of interest, because the "Gitea" name was reused for two different concepts. Now that it's CommitGo as the (legally independent) contract development agency, it's much clearer. There is a Gitea company as well but it just needs to hold trademarks and domain names and cloud stuff.
Isn't the Gitea company for-profit? Wasn't the leadership committee restructured to mandate half of its members are elected by the for-profit?
Browsing the blog archives, there doesn't appear to be any indication that the concerns that were brought up around the incorporation of the for-profit have been resolved.
> The Gitea project is still community-driven and has the same yearly elections for leadership that has been around for close to a decade now :)
[1] mentions changes to the election process that mandates half of the oversight committee to be appointed by the Gitea company. Doesn't that conflict with your assertion that the "same yearly elections" have been around?
Where can one find the governance charter for the Gitea project?
> The final launch will be Thundermail, an email hosting service using the open-source Stalwart stack. Users will be able to pick between thundermail.com and tb.pro domains.
If the article is correct, Thundermail will be built using Stalwart[1], which appears to support JMAP
Framework started selling larger batteries in 2023 (61 Whr vs the base 55 Whr), and from looking through older reviews it looks like battery life significantly improved (>25% better) with the 13th-gen Intel upgrade [1]. I've got their 13-inch AMD 7840U but can't speak to the battery life as it mostly sits docked.
A lot of their early value-proposition were saner security defaults and additions to increase confidence in the software's security. A lot of the changes were attempted to upstream into Gitea, but not everything made its way in. They were a soft-fork for a while before hard-forking, and even after the hard-fork continued to sync changes from Gitea where possible.
Forgejo v10 is the first release I've seen where there's been a focus on tiny UX improvements (versus trying to remain compatible with Gitea). I'm hopeful these will continue to come, but it does still feel essentially identical in appearance and functionality with Gitea.
There's a bit of a difference between a downstream commercial host and turning the open-source project into open-core. Gitea went from a rotating governance to deciding half of the decision-makers must now come from a for-profit company that now competes with the open-source offering.
Are you certain extensions can be downloaded and installed from anywhere? Firefox's documentation[1] states "Extensions and themes need to be signed by Mozilla before they can be installed in release and beta versions of Firefox." If UBlock Lite was rejected through Mozilla's signing API, they'd have no ability to create an XPI that can be installed by release/beta version of Firefox.
Cloudtrail writes to s3 at intervals, which means it make take a few minutes for the log entry related to your request ID to show.
I've found Athena doesn't appear to search through all log entries (possible user error on my part); I've been downloading the cloudtrail logs directly from S3 and grepping through the logs directly to find the relevant entries to figure out the permissions needed.
If you need to decode an encrypted error message, use `aws sts decode-authorization-message --encoded-message $MESSAGE`. It'll return a JSON string. I typically use `aws --profile limbledevadmin sts decode-authorization-message --output text --encoded-message $MSG | jq .context.action` to extract the needed permission.
The benchmarks appear to show AWS wins by a considerable margin in all tests, and is cheaper at all quoted price points, but is hardly above Azure in the cost performance table. This appears to be due to including Azure's reserved pricing but continuing to use AWS and GCP's on-demand pricing. This is misleading, as both GCP and AWS offer discounts for yearly commitments.
Not sure what OP is referring to, but Microsoft has multiple Visual Studio Code extensions (e.g. Remote SSH) that are closed-source and hard-coded not to work with any self-compiled versions of Visual Studio Code.
> We do not have an adequate history with our subscription or pricing models to accurately predict the long-term rate of customer subscription renewals or adoption, or the impact these renewals and adoption will have on our revenues or operating results.
For context, GitLab recently axed their lowest priced plan and grandfathered in existing users at cheaper rates for the next year. Their retention rate may drop once discounts run out and the new pricing kicks in.
As to the parent's comment about "The Homer" and non-core features being bad, I'd point to their CI autoscaling solution as an example of being underdeveloped, over-marketed, and suffering from technical debt. Their autoscaler uses docker machine behind-the-scenes, which hooks into various cloud providers to abstract away the act of spinning up new VMs. It works reasonably well, but Docker has archived the repository and no longer supports the software. GitLab forked the repository and maintains it for critical fixes, but is not willing to develop or accept new features. It has been known to break against new versions of Docker, does not handle concurrency very well in new environments, and does not allow [1] executing multiple concurrent jobs within spun up VMs, despite marketing that it can [2].
While the autoscaler does work, it's limitations and quirks reduces it's utility and cost-savings significantly within smaller organizations. The technical debt leaves me doubting any improvements will come within the next few years as they try to architect a new solution to replace the existing one.
I have no idea how GitLab compares in other areas, but within CI autoscaling it seems they're stuck with a cliff to climb down before they can move forward again.
> Free is for a single developer, with the purchasing decision led by that same person
> Premium is for team (s) usage, with the purchasing decision led by one or more Directors
Doesn't this conflict with the stewardship promise that "The open source codebase will have all the features that are essential to running a large 'forge' with public and private repositories"?