We have been doing something similar but it sounds like you have come further along this way of working. We (with help from Claude) have built a similar tool that you describe to interface with our task- and project management system, and use it together with the Gitlab and Github CLI tools to allow agents to read tickets, formulate a plan and create solutions and create MR/PR to the relevant repos. For most of our knowledge base we use Markdown but some of it is tied up in Confluence, that's why I have an interest in that part. And, some is even in workflows are in Google Docs which makes the OP tool interesting as well -- currently our tool output Markdown and we just "paste from markdown" into Gdocs. We might be able to revise and improve that too.
For open source project management tools I prefer to use the integrated solution from Phabricator[1], nowadays called Phorge[2]. It has workboards, very good access control and separation of projects (tags). See an example board[3].
I get the narrative of the article, but I think it is counterproductive to use headlines like this. I have noticed this sentiment that the article author is pointing to ("the world only needs containers", etc) on Reddit and other forums. But the reality is that Openstack is a very capable IaaS platform that does not have a match in the open source space. If you are comfortable using commercial solutions, then yes, there are certainly ones that could compare to Openstack in one aspect or another. But if we are agreeing that open source is good (for the market) in the long term then it would be unwise to think that Openstack is done and over with.
My experience is that Openstack opens up the world of cloud infrastructure to organizations that are either very large and therefore have the inclination to own their services and workloads, or organizations that have specific security requirements.
I wrote an answer on Super User [0] on how to use this neat tool. There are use cases where it really comes in handy. For example when copying a lot of files around to various folders that sits on the same disk so that you can assume that it won't run efficiently in parallel.
When I think of it even lftp has queue and jobs commands. But "task spooler" is the generic tool you can use for more general use cases than file copying.
I use this to encrypt files as well and I think Emacs handles this very well for individual files. It is however the notes management tool that doesn't support transparently search through multiple files.
I imagine what is needed is using gpg-agent to handle passwordless decryption of the files at rest.
There have been a few of these note taking systems that have passed through HN lately. I use org-mode for some notes and sometimes open-junk-file (that I discovered in in Spacemacs). What I miss is a tool that will help me keep some notes encrypted at rest but will allow me to search filenames _and_ content. nb seems to support searching, and encryption, but not the two in combination.
There have been a few of these note taking systems that have passed through HN lately. I use org-mode for some notes and sometimes open-junk-file (that I discovered in in Spacemacs). What I miss is a tool that will help me keep some notes encrypted at rest but will allow me to search filenames _and_ content. nb seems to support searching, and encryption, but not the two in combination.
This is just plain wrong. There are many ways to handle such a situation. One would be "visstidsanställning" which is employment for a pre-determined period.
Seems somewhat similar to resources[0] in Concourse in that they use a container image that has a defined entry point.
Concourse refers to this as a "get step"[1] or a "put step", which calls a pre-defined script inside the container with a custom set of parameters. The "put step" is used when you expect side effects, while a "get step" is used to check status on some resource and trigger jobs.
In general it makes the CI/CD system easily composable and clean. Concourse manages this very well and while I haven't used Bitbucket Pipes I suspect it to be a good experience as well.
I have seen these kind of prohibitions at for example Nasdaq OMX. I assume it is legal if it is agreed in a contract. There is a balance here what might be a "human right" and what could be in conflict with the best of the company -- and it would seem reasonable for a company to try this. If they will find people willing to sign that contract is another matter altogether.
I find it very curious if they have the legal power to enforce this. If it is not in the employment contract then a prohibition like this would not stand. Sure, the employer could try to implement this but I am quite sure it is against their labour laws.
We have been doing something similar but it sounds like you have come further along this way of working. We (with help from Claude) have built a similar tool that you describe to interface with our task- and project management system, and use it together with the Gitlab and Github CLI tools to allow agents to read tickets, formulate a plan and create solutions and create MR/PR to the relevant repos. For most of our knowledge base we use Markdown but some of it is tied up in Confluence, that's why I have an interest in that part. And, some is even in workflows are in Google Docs which makes the OP tool interesting as well -- currently our tool output Markdown and we just "paste from markdown" into Gdocs. We might be able to revise and improve that too.