My understanding is that if you just need to return a response to the client as quickly as possible, but are ok with then processing your task directly after that, then it's still usable today.
But if you want to schedule a task further in the future, then a new backend will be needed for that.
I think the bigger use case is being able to (backoff) retry failing API calls to 3rd party services. AFAIUI the new tasks package doesnt offer this in v1 which is a deal breaker for my project, at least.
For me I think it works well as is because my use case is sending several different emails after POST'ing to a view, which, there is no need to make the user wait for in my case, as they don't care about the status of the mail delivery.
But I realize there are many other usecases too that will need proper workers.
I guess the idea is first to provide a generic interface to connect various backends to and let the community develop those. Users of Django should then be able to swap one out for another. Maybe one will emerge as a quasi-standard or maybe it will be like database backends where different backends serve different purposes.
I have been an Evernote, then Notion and now a Jopplin user.
A feature I used a lot in these apps is the browser extension that allows me to quickly bookmark a web page into a note.
Would you consider such a feature?
With Bitbucket, as well as Gitlab and likely others that I haven't used, the CI pipelines are stored as a plaintext configuration in the repo itself. So, repo commit access automatically gives you the ability to modify the pipeline.
Check this out. You _almost_ use the most expensive service.
I think you should expand your awareness. Hetzner for instance doesn't mention anywhere that they throttle your 10gbit uplink, but they limit to 20TB/month, with ~1EUR for every TB over. Seems like you wouldn't even have noticed what you described in your article.
I'm wondering about the security of using a random alphabet with this instead of the default one. In my mind this amounts to a form of cryptography, but I have no idea how to analyse how much security it gives.
EDIT: Reading the faq I see that they insist that sqids cannot provide any encryption. This does not fit with my understanding of the word. Using unique random alphabet is probably the oldest form of encryption. Whether or not it is secure enough depends on your threat model. What I want and what I need is a way to calculate the security provided by a random alphabet.
