Aside of the fees, another important goal is political freedom against any US sanction on our citizen.

We saw recently that ICC judges were excluded of Visa/Mastercard/... payment system

source: https://www.lemonde.fr/en/international/article/2025/11/19/n...

Is there good self hosted alternative to github action ? Jenkins should be still good even if old ?

GitLab CE has the runner implementation baked in.

Keep in mind GitHub Actions is actually like 5 different products. So are you asking for the webhooks/events implementation, the runner orchestration implementation, the runtime image, the secrets storage implementation or the marketplace? All of these could theoretically be disparate components. GitLab gives you everything above but the marketplace

it was greener (grassland, savannas) but definitely not a rain forest. And in fact it was also the same for Arabia. More grassland and savannas than today.

But it was only partial: there was some desert area too. They were just not a large and mostly very dry desert like today.

Well, Russia itself is oil founded (huge part of the budget)

It’s not a coincidence that the weird red carpet summit in Alaska for Putin apparently focused on joint energy projects with this shambolic administration.

https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/us-russian-officials...

Who needs argument in 2025 ? Just say it is "woke".

revision based on new findings is how science works revision based on ideology is how fascism works

And the best part is that you can tell which is which by whether you agree or not.

Yes the clean and efficient alternative would be a session manager "server" running on the server and communicating with the terminal "client" (like kitty) using a more efficient protocol for handling panes/windows/drawing etc...

AFAIK this doesn't exist, so I'm using tmux...

well after a quick search it exists: it's called tmux control-mode https://github.com/tmux/tmux/wiki/Control-Mode

So terminal clients just have to implement this protocol... it's already implemented in iTerm2

What makes org mode tied to emacs ? I really need to try org mode to understand it. If only I had time...

It’s really integrated into emacs.

First, you have the calendar, but it’s not just a date picker, it’s also shows holidays and other markers.

Then you have the capture (quick entry) where you have the full power of emacs environment plus lisp language to code anything you want. Emacs have other applications like a file manager, mail readers, document readers…, and you can capture the context as well as the note itself.

Then, there’s the agenda, which is fully customizable with a mix of options and code.

And there’s the exporters. Notice that emacs have support for most of the format, so it’s more like an handover to some other parts of emacs. But you don’t merely transform the document from org to html as an example. You extract the html from the org structure as you can filter sections out. Also a lot of options there (and code)

And code blocks (named babel). That you can execute.

So org can be a static document format or a dynamic environment. And all of that because of emacs as the buffer concept is very fluid. In emacs there are only buffers. Each buffer is assigned a major mode which is just a set of functions that does stuff on the buffer text. And you have the minor modes (more functions) that are more like plugins. And you’re free to hack on them. It’s just that the default set looks like a text editor.

As a very practical example: You take notes in org-mode, and as you do in many modern note-taking apps, you use copious links between notes.

But org-mode is inside Emacs, and Emacs is (can be) also your email client. So your notes can link to emails. Emacs is also your calendar. So your notes can link to events.

You can extend this to almost anything if you like Emacs enough. Your notes link to source code files (or your notes contain code, which can be executed from your notes). Emacs is also your git front end, so you could link to commits.

This is a great comment. My "Aha" moment with org-mode was when I started using it to track my TODOs on ongoing branch. I was able to link bookmarks to actual code from my org mode agenda, jump back and forth between my todo list and the actual code in my repo, add more, add context, etc.

Elisp, but not really elisp, more the environment of elisp. It's a LISP machine. Hard to explain, it's a different way of computing. Another living instance of this model of computing is a Smalltalk image. Others have written about how LISPing makes you a better coder much better than I could. Try it out!

I disagree, Elisp doesn't tie org to Emacs at all. What does tie org to Emacs is the fact that Emacs' org-mode (i.e. the mode you use to edit org files) provides a great DevEx when editing org files, including lots of convenience shortcuts. (Again, the fact that those are written in Elisp is irrelevant.)

It does. A lot of advanced options in Org have escape hatches for more code, and the fact that you configure org in Elisp and are free to hack on org provided functions due to the Elips environment add to its versality.

I would like also that devs run their site/apps on downgraded machine/VM so that they can early detect performance issues.

I’ve realized how huge a problem this is by spending time with older relatives recently. Many of them have >5 year old phones (why upgrade?), that current websites and apps often just don’t run on. They SHOULD be able to run - they just don’t.

In my company the frontend team has shiny new powerful machines. I on the other hand don't have enough RAM to compile our server.

Does that create a sort of Conway's law pushing complexity to the FE?

They offset that risk by taking 2 months to design and implement complex features like "add a new text box in the form, to enter an IP address".

I haven't seen them merge a pull request in less than 3 days. However simple.

The team lead, in 2 years, contributed less than 20 pull requests, all of which were 1 to 3 line changes to CSS or similar.

what's wrong with luajit ? (I never used it)

edit: sorry I should have searched, Luajit only supports up to Lua 5.1

There is design tension between the language designer and the VM implementation. AFAIK some features post 5.1 make performant VM implementations difficult. Lua is originally a configuration language where performance didn't matter all that much. Because Luajit is so fast much more of the application code can be done in the scripting environment so now the performance matters much more than it did.

So the spectrum is from newer language and slower to older language and faster. If performance is an issue the cost of the newer language features could be that more of the application code has to be written in C++ instead of Lua - in that context the Lua language shouldn't be considered independent of the host language. Performance matters to me so increase in C++ code would not be worth the newer language features. Using Rust instead of C++ as the host language might change the landscape again since Rust is so much more ergonomic than C++.