A title is just something a company calls a particular job. A role is what that job actually is. So a lot of jobs might be called “QA engineer”, but not fitting the intended role

I’m thinking of it not as a title, but a role. Often times the 2 are not related

That’s what QA engineering is for. They are integrated into the dev team and they pull double duty with QA and code review.

I think QA engineering needs to become more widespread. The “extra pair of eyes” can’t compare to a department of people dedicated to code review and testing.

Create a file handler class to avoid the issue

Someone has to bite the bullet and ask the obvious questions. Everybody starts somewhere and learns at their own pace, so there’s probably dozens more with the same problem but too afraid to ask.

Bug fixes can be delayed for a security sweep. One of the quicker ways that come to mind is checking the hash between built from source and the tarball

Yes, and the moment this broke other project maintainers are working on finding exploits now. They read the same news we do and have those same concerns.

And due to open source, it was still caught within a month. Nothing could ever convince me more than that how secure FOSS can be.

Ok I feel like I need to say something because it wasn’t just a one-off mistake. You’re spelling Debian incorrectly.

I get what you mean, but I prefer massive fines due immediately vs expensive and drawn out processes. Using my example, the very absolute bottom of the barrel Intel’s fine could be is a percentage of over $500B (Intel’s revenue in 2009 was $35B, multiplied by 15). Even at 1% based on this floor, the fine would be over $5B.

Personally, I think it would be easier for all involved to just fine based on a percentage of global annual revenue from the date of the violation to present. If they want personhood so bad, then they can have this too.

Edit for an example: let’s say Intel does anticompetitive behavior 15 years ago and a court case finds them liable for damages today. Add up the last 15 years worth of global revenue, and take a percentage of that.

They’re currently shaking hands and too busy to let us borrow their names

I suppose I can respect that opinion on memory management, but also disagree that we should always trust the programmer. I was mostly commenting on the syntax, if it weren’t for the fact that I was on the website for Hare I would have thought it was Rust.

It’s got a lot of good ideas from what I saw in the quick guide, but I feel like lifetimes are the next step for memory management in general. If they really want manual memory management to be default, they could continue to flip Rust and make a safe attribute for functions

The language itself seems pretty heavily inspired by rust. On that note, why in the hell wouldn’t they use ownership for memory management?

Ez, feature bloat the project so all those dependancies are actively used

Absolutely. And the best time is when things are good.

Consider unionizing. If you’ve already checked out and are even mildly concerned about the next one, then there’s nothing left to lose

Sponsored by QA gang. Gotta make sure it’s a 5/5 issue and not just a frequent issue

It’s just the natural progression of things