@toby1kenobi@fosstodon.org
@toby1kenobi@fosstodon.org avatar

toby1kenobi

@toby1kenobi@fosstodon.org

Husband, father, software developer

This profile is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.

gamerchick02, to random
@gamerchick02@techhub.social avatar

Quite enjoying Ubuntu Budgie. Seems to be a little lighter than stock Ubuntu and with fewer issues? I don't know. I did a full install instead of upgrading in place. Luckily the laptop doesn't hold a lot of files.

toby1kenobi,
@toby1kenobi@fosstodon.org avatar

@gamerchick02 @RL_Dane on Ubuntu I've recently switched from Gnome to QTile, and I'm loving it. However, it has become apparent how much hand-holding Gnome does, which I'm now missing. Simple things I took for granted like being able to switch which wifi access point I'm connected to. I now do that with a CLI command. And everything in the Gnome settings app, I have to find and install another little app for each item.

toby1kenobi,
@toby1kenobi@fosstodon.org avatar

@gamerchick02 @RL_Dane having said that, I still find the pros of tiling WM outweigh the cons, and wouldn't go back. The pros being:

  1. Filling the screen with exactly what you need to see and nothing more, without obscuring things
  2. Clean modern look
  3. The boom-bada-boom stuff that @RL_Dane mentioned.
    But for each person, let them use whatever WM they are most comfortable with (the joy of Linux is that we can choose that sort of thing)
b0rk, to random
@b0rk@jvns.ca avatar

there's something weird about git branches that "a branch is just a reference to a commit" does not capture and I've been struggling with it for weeks

like in this diagram I think most people would say that there are 3 branches (corresponding to the 3 commits at the top of the diagram), though technically in git you could have 0, 3, or 100 branches here, and it's not labelled so you have no way to know how many branches there are

(please don't try to explain branches to me ty)

toby1kenobi,
@toby1kenobi@fosstodon.org avatar

@b0rk I think that's exactly right. Try to explain why rebase is called "rebase" without using the intuitive meaning of branch - you can't because there isn't really any other name for that concept of "a line of commits that are forked off from another line of commits". If we weren't meant to be calling that "branch" then there would be another name for it. I think the actual definition of a git branch should be considered an implementation detail.

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • β€’
  • megavids
  • rosin
  • ngwrru68w68
  • Durango
  • DreamBathrooms
  • mdbf
  • magazineikmin
  • thenastyranch
  • Youngstown
  • khanakhh
  • slotface
  • everett
  • vwfavf
  • kavyap
  • provamag3
  • osvaldo12
  • GTA5RPClips
  • ethstaker
  • tacticalgear
  • InstantRegret
  • cisconetworking
  • cubers
  • tester
  • anitta
  • modclub
  • Leos
  • normalnudes
  • JUstTest
  • All magazines
    •