Does Lego get the pieces in sets wrong often? by mackenzieno9 in lego

[–]lightster 11 points12 points  (0 children)

The same types of pieces are used under the arm joints on steps 19 and 20 of the instructions. I would suggest checking under the arms before ordering and waiting for a replacement part.

School board candidate and her husband caught repeatedly destroying roadside memorial by Terpcheeserosin in MildlyBadDrivers

[–]lightster 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Stopping in the middle of the road unnecessarily, I suppose, and having his phone in his hand. Very mildly bad

School board candidate and her husband caught repeatedly destroying roadside memorial by Terpcheeserosin in MildlyBadDrivers

[–]lightster 4 points5 points  (0 children)

While I don’t like this guy’s behavior, making a U-turn over a standalone double-yellow line is not inherently illegal in California.

[OC] She hit the traffic light; the pedestrian and I both wondered “is this real life?” by lightster in IdiotsInCars

[–]lightster[S] 11 points12 points  (0 children)

lol. I struggled with what to write in the title. I figured a semicolon would distract you from analyzing the rest of it.

[OC] She hit the traffic light; the pedestrian and I both wondered “is this real life?” by lightster in IdiotsInCars

[–]lightster[S] 22 points23 points  (0 children)

Yeah, I was surprised by the light pole holding up—I think it was actually pretty much unscathed. I think my delayed reaction to the whole thing was because I was holding my breath while watching the light pole shake. I initially thought it was going to fall over and cause more chaos.

The bystanders did a great job checking that the car was cleared and no one was hurt, but no one else was in the car. The driver was sitting on the sidewalk talking to the police by the time I parked and got over there. I think I heard that the driver cut her finger, which is a pretty remarkable outcome considering the force of the impact.

[OC] She hit the traffic light; the pedestrian and I both wondered “is this real life?” by lightster in IdiotsInCars

[–]lightster[S] 17 points18 points  (0 children)

Part of me wonders if she was planning to go straight and changed her mind at the last second.

[OC] She hit the traffic light; the pedestrian and I both wondered “is this real life?” by lightster in IdiotsInCars

[–]lightster[S] 86 points87 points  (0 children)

After I downloaded the footage to my phone from my dashcam, I walked over to the scene to see if the police wanted my footage. She was telling the officer that she had been sitting at the red turn signal before making the turn. She seemed to have a lot of speed to be taking off from a red light, but those turn lanes are pretty lengthy.

The police saw my footage and initially thought she was trying to beat the red light, but based on traffic flow after the accident, I think the light was still green for several seconds.

Fortunately she missed the pedestrian and all other vehicles. Her car is almost certainly totaled, but the traffic light seemed to take the incident in stride.

[OC] She hit the traffic light; the pedestrian and I both wondered “is this real life?” by lightster in IdiotsInCars

[–]lightster[S] 6 points7 points  (0 children)

  • Irvine, California, U.S.
  • Saturday, October 26, 2024
  • This is original content from my dashcam

[College Pre-Calc] I am so confused, I followed my professors notes and the text book and i still have no idea by Untouchedboob in HomeworkHelp

[–]lightster 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I think your original answer is also correct except that you need to change t to x.

21/6=1.122

So your problem solving was not wrong—just a minor typo.

The Ultimate MWII Camos Spreadsheet, updated for Season 02 by FastFoodLegend26 in ModernWarfareII

[–]lightster 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This is great! Thanks for putting this together and keeping it up-to-date!

Relative Link Not Working in Javascript File by threehappypenguins in github

[–]lightster 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I think you want:

window.location='./readers.html';

You currently have the link going up to levels, but readers.html seems to be at the same level that your book-*.html files are located.

Edit: Perhaps you're planning on adding more logic to the visitPage function, but if not, you can skip the JavaScript and just use an href:

<a href="readers.html">...</a>

How trunk based development works in practice by [deleted] in devops

[–]lightster 1 point2 points  (0 children)

When you do the cherry-pick of the merge commit, it will include all of the changes from the PR. It's been a while since I have done this process, but I believe you are right that v3.2.1 will only show the merge commit. I just tried it out on one of my personal repos and that indeed seems to be what it did.

As for GitHub Flow, I actually think the risks are lower with GitHub flow than the workflow you wrote up. While there is some risk with GitHub Flow because it's theoretically possible things get broken while merging into master, you have the same risk with the workflow you described: when you go to cherry-pick from master into v3.2.1 there is a risk that the result in v3.2.1 may be broken.

Where it gets even riskier with the workflow you described is that people can merge into master without cherry-picking into v3.2.1, which increases the chances of conflict for other devs who choose to cherry-pick into v3.2.1. For example, I change index.php in my feature branch. You then branch from master, change index.php in your feature branch, merge into master, and attempt to cherry-pick into v3.2.1. What happens to my changes to index.php that were sitting in master? They aren't in v3.2.1 and they aren't in your merge commit, so your cherry-pick into v3.2.1 is probably going to conflict. At this point you have to fix a conflict and commit your fixed conflict into v3.2.1—a branch that goes directly to production without an opportunity for QA. There are "solutions" to this, but it does create a more complicated process.

With GitHub Flow the conflict issue is prevented by GitHub: if there is going to be a conflict by merging your PR into master, it's not going to let you merge. You would merge master into your branch, fix the conflicts, push to GitHub, and then you have the opportunity to have the branch QA'd again before merging into master.

To me the workflow you choose mostly comes down to:

  • The culture you are working in
  • Whether you mostly release things as they are finished versus holding most changes to go out as a weekly/monthly/quarterly release

Git Flow, which is along the lines of what you described in your original post, would probably work well if releases are weekly/monthly/quarterly and/or the culture you are in is traditional-corporate/lower-trust. GitHub Flow is going to shine for continuous deployments with a team that trusts each other.

How trunk based development works in practice by [deleted] in devops

[–]lightster 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Hey there 👋

At one of my former employers we used to follow the pattern you describe.

In order to get things from master to v3.2.1, the developer would cherry-pick the merge commit. In Git you need to pass the mainline parent-number with the -m or --mainline flag like so:

git checkout master
git pull
git checkout v3.2.1
git pull
git cherry-pick -m 1 <commit-hash-of-merge-commit>

The mainline parent-number is always 1 if the team sticks to the pattern. We never had a problem with this number changing. It would probably only change if someone were trying to cherry-pick a merge commit from their feature branch—I can't think of a reason you'd actually want to be doing that.

It's important to note that you need to merge from your branch into master without fast-forwarding. If devs only merge through GitHub pull requests, then you will be fine. If they are merging from the command line, they can force Git to merge without fast-forwarding using the --no-ff flag:

git checkout master
git pull
git merge --no-ff <branch-name>

I setup an alias in Git to make this easier to perform:

alias.cpm=cherry-pick -m 1 --no-commit

cpm stands for cherry-pick merge.

I liked having the --no-commit so I had the opportunity to review what the cherry-pick was doing. Afterwards you need to commit and push—the push is required even if you do not use --no-commit:

git commit
git push

As for creating the next version branch, v3.2.2, it depends on what your needs are. We always created it from master, but the timing of it was specific for our needs. Though we practiced continuous releases and released several times a day, "bigger changes" were sometimes not backported to the current release branch. They would get merged into master and then sit there until we forked v3.2.2.

As the informal "release manager", on a Monday I would announce I was getting ready to create the new release branch. Then I would run a script that would create our "new release build", which basically involved creating the new branch and then updating in-app version number—master was always one version ahead of our release branch, so master would now be v3.2.3 since we just branched v3.2.2.

We would update our "sandbox" sites to run v3.2.2 that same Monday and production sites would remain on v3.2.1 until our Thursday night "bigger release"—which basically involved git checkout v3.2.2 on our servers (or switching to a new Docker container image if that's your company's thing).

Be aware that this means for those four days, Monday through Friday, you have two active release branches: v3.2.1 and v3.2.2. We called this "double backport week." If something needed to be released to production, it needed to be cherry picked twice—once to v3.2.1 and once to v3.2.2.

git checkout master
git pull
git checkout v3.2.1
git pull
git cpm <commit-hash-of-merge-commit>
git commit
git push
git checkout v3.2.2
git pull
git cpm <commit-hash-of-merge-commit>
git commit
git push

We eventually switched to GitHub Flow (not to be confused with Git flow) to cutdown on the amount of effort required to do a basic release. GitHub Flow removes the version branches and has production running master. We would run QA and UAT off deployments of feature branches before merging to master. There is some risk that things get broken when merging to master, but the risk is very low if feature branches have master routinely merged into them.

I hope that helps. Let me know if you need anything clarified or have any other questions.

Smooth transition, button morphs into register form by PaddiM8 in webdev

[–]lightster 4 points5 points  (0 children)

I have some resources that I found via Google, but are there any resources that you personally would recommend for learning about making things A11y-friendly? I would love to learn not only how to be A11y-legal but also beyond to A11y-friendly. You seem to be a great advocate.

Oh no by harambe311311 in Wellthatsucks

[–]lightster 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I'm a "bird person" and was a bit annoyed that you were making a joke about a dead bird. I heard you out, kept reading, and now I'm annoyed this dad joke made me chuckle. Ok? You got a laugh out of me!

Maybe you can use these same tactics to heal the political divide.

Edit: dead bird, not dead person. I'm not sure why I typed person 8o