You are far worse than the people you are claiming to act against.
Lots of people can feel something is a problem and struggle to articulate it. So you have to take people on a case by case basis.
OP talks about how they feel diverse characters are shoe horned in or badly written. Ask them to provide an example.
When they can’t, then call them out. They are a bigot and deserve scorn.
If they can provide an example, help them understand the issue and use appropriate language.
Calling someone out who genuinely feels there is a problem doesn’t stop them feeling there is a problem. These people will go looking for some who acknowledges their feelings.
Which is how you make a bigot
I think they are saying most attempts at diversity come from middle aged white guys and just end up being poorly done and so detract from the game/story.
Similar to how 00’s electronic companies just painted it pink to appeal to women or why South Park added Token.
So arguing for more diversity within the companies themselves
Every big UK company I have worked for doesn’t own its building. They will typically agree to rent a building for 5-20 years at a fixed rate (longer times if its being purpose built for them) .
So I would expect this is paying out the rest of the rental agreements for a building to escape the building lease.
It is to do with financial reporting and the way asset and operational costs are reported.
Immutable distributions won’t solve the problem.
You have 3 types of testing unit (descrete part of code), integration (how a software piece works with others) and system testing (e.g. the software running in its environment). Modern software development has build chains to simplify testing all 3 levels.
Debian’s change freeze effectively puts a known state of software through system testing. The downside its effecitvely ‘free play’ testing of the software so it requires a big pool of users and a lot of time to be effective. This means software in debian can use releases up to 3 years old.
Something like Fedora relies on the test packs built into the open source software, the issue here is testing in open source world is really variable in quality. So somethinng like Fedora can pull down broken code that passes its tests and compiles.
The immutable concept is about testing a core set of utilities so you can run the containers of software on top. You haven’t stopped the code in the containers being released with bugs or breaking changes you’ve just given yourself a means to back out of it. It’s a band aid to the actual problem.
The solution is to look at core parts of the software stack and look to improve the test infrastructure, phoronix manages to run the latest Kernel’s on various types of hardware for benchmarking, why hasn’t the Linux foundation set up a computing hall to compile and run system level testing for staged changes?
Similarly website’s are largely developed with all 3 levels of testing, using things like Jest/Mocha/etc… for Unit/Integration testing and Robots/Cypress/Selenium/Storybook/etc… for system testing. While GTK and KDE apps all have unit/integration tests where are the system level test frameworks?
All this is kinda boring while ‘containers!’ is exciting new technology
It isn’t a good move.
A domain name can cost as little as £10, similarly most email services cost ~£5-£15 per person per month. Its normally pretty easy to link a domain to an email provider and doesn’t cost anything other than time.
If a company can’t be bothered to implement the most basic online branding people will make their assumptions and some will filter your company out because of it. With the cost to implement so low (e.g. £160 per year), even the loss/gain of a single customer would justify it.
The splash screen (boot screen instead of text)used to get me. It provided by an application called ‘Plymouth’.
You used to need to install it and configure grub, however I think if you go into ‘System Settings’ and type ‘Splash’ KDE has an option to install and choose the screen
I wouldn’t use “certified” in this context.
Limiting support of software to specific software configurations makes sense.
Its stuff like Debian might be using Python 3.8 Ubuntu Python 3.9, OpenSuse Python 3.9, etc… Your application might use a Python 3.9 requiring library and act odd on 3.8 but fine on 3.7, etc… so only supporting X distributions let you make the test/QA process sane.
This is also why Docker/Flatpack exist since you can define all of this.
However the normal mix is RHEL/Suse/Ubuntu because those target businesses and your target market will most likely be running one.
I suspect they mean around packaging.
I honestly believe Red Hat has a policy that everything should pull in Gnome. I have had headless RHEL installs and half the CLI tools require Gnome Keyring (even if they don’t deal with secrets or store any). Back in RHEL 7, Kate the KDE based Text Editor pulled in a bunch of GTK dependencies somehow.
Certification is really someone paid to go through a process and so its designed so they pass.
Think about the people you know who are Agile/Cloud/whatever certified and how all it means is they have learnt the basic examples.
Its no different when a business gets certified.
The only reason people care is because they can point to the cert if it all goes wrong
Debian isn’t old == stable, its tested == stable.
Debian has an effective Rolling distribution through testing than can get ahead of Arch.
At some point they freeze the software versions in testing and look for Release Critical and Major bugs. Once they have shaken everything and submitted fixes where possible. It then becomes stable.
The idea is people have tested a set baseline of software and there are no known major bugs.
For the 4-5 releases Debian has released every 2 years (Similar to Ubuntu LTS). Debian tends to align its release with LTS Kernel and Mesa releases so there have been times the latest stable is running newer versions than Ubuntu and the newest software crown switches between Ubuntu LTS and Debian each year.
For some the priority to run software that won’t have major bugs, that is what Debian, Ubuntu LTS and RHEL offer.
Most of the updates are about long term support the performance gains are a side product.
This driver was one of the earliest open source drivers developed by AMD. The point of the driver is to convert OpenGL (instructions games give to draw 3D shapes) into the low level commands a graphics card uses.
A library (TMSC I think) was written to do this, however they found OpenGL commands often relied on the results of others and converting back to OpenGL was really CPU expensive.
So someone invented NIR, its an intermediate layer. You convert all OpenGL commands to NIR and it uses way less CPU to convert from NIR to GPU commands and back.
People in their spare time have been updating the old AMD drivers so they use the same libraries, interfaces, etc… as the modern AMD drivers.
This update removes the last of the TMSC? usage so now the driver uses only NIR.
From a dev perspective everything now works the same way (less effort) from a user perspective those old cards get the performance bump NIR brought.
QT is a cross platform UI development framework, its goal is to look native to the platform it operates on. This video by a linux maintainer from 2014 explains its benefits over GTK, its a fun video and I don’t think the issues have really changed.
Most GTK advocates will argue QT is developed by Trolltech and isn’t GPL licensed so could go closed source! This argument seems to ignore open source projects use the Open Source releases of QT and if Trolltech did close source then the last open source would be maintained (much like GTK).
Personally I would avoid Flutter on the grounds its a Google owned library and Google have the attention span of a toddler.
Not helping that assessment is Google let go of the Fuschia team (which Flutter was being developed for) and seems to have let go a lot of Flutter developers.
Personally I hate web frontends as local applications. They integrate poorly on the desktop and often the JS engine has weird memory leaks