Testcontainers uses ‘ryuk’ to clean up containers and it needs docker socket mounted within its container to work. So if you had any hardening config that prevents the docker socket access within a container e.g user namespace or SELinux then Testcontainers doesn’t work.

And I think it would be nice if Testcontainers ‘just worked’ with Podman without any additional steps.

Nothing else. Though docker socket issue was important enough.

You have to practice switching between neovim and other editors.

You have forgotten how to use a normal editor. I am not making it up, it is a real phenomenon. Similar to when SmarterEveryDay learned to ride a backwards bicycle he forgot how to ride a normal bicycle and essentially had to re-learn it. You have to re-learn how to use a normal editor.

1. It might be a card grabber.
2. Don’t put real card details of course.

It wants you to put dummy details as fast as you can.

It is a game, but it might also be a card grabber.

I did not make this, and you’re supposed to put dummy details there. Don’t put actual credit card information.

Thanks man, my brain was short-circuited on Testcontainers so I couldn’t write better. Also I am stealing the title.

I don’t get it, how would a database container run your unit tests? And unless you know some secret option to stop the database after, say, it is idle for a few seconds, it will continue running.

The purpose is to test database dependent code by spinning up a real database and run your code against that.

It’s the same picture.

Here you go

Yes it is the ratings on winehq, https://appdb.winehq.org/

And yes, an average user probably going to fire a game, figure out it is not working, and promptly go back to windows, which makes that data less accurate, but what can we do about it?

The left axis is total number of ratings of each type (Garbage, Bronze, Silver, Gold, Platinum) in a given month (not per app). For example for month 2016-07 there were

  "Garbage" => 22
  "Bronze" => 14
  "Silver" => 13
  "Gold" => 55
  "Platinum" => 61

On right side is the average rating. So if I assign values to each rating:

  "Garbage" => 1
  "Bronze" => 2
  "Silver" => 3
  "Gold" => 4
  "Platinum" => 5

I can get an average rating, which will be between 1 to 5.

((22*1) + (14*2) + (13*3) + (55*4) + (61*5)) / (22 + 14 + 13 + 55 + 61)
 ~=  3.721

No… too hard.

npm ruin dev running shittier could be a nice prank… depending on how often it gets typed.

That advertisement would be interpreted as Node C’s advertisement.

The plan is to treat public keys as node’s identity and trust mechanism similar to OpenPGP (e.g. include any node key signed by a master key as a cluster member)

Right now, none of the encryption part is done and it is not a priority right now. I need to first implement transitive node detection, actually forward packets between nodes, some way to store and manage routes, and then trust and encryption mechanisms before I’d dare to test this stuff on a real network.

The UI is desktop only for now, I’ll make the mobile UI some day.

I didn’t know the answer either, but usually you can compose solution from solutions of smaller problems.

solution(0): There are no disks. Nothing to do. solution(n): Let’s see if I can use solution(n-1) here. I’ll use solution(n-1) to move all but last disk A->B, just need to rename the pins. Then move the largest disk A->C. Then use solution(n-1) to move disks B->C by renaming the pins. There we go, we have a stack based solution running in exponential time.

It’s one of the easiest problem in algorithm design, but running the solution by hand would give you a PTSD.

Replacing “Programmers:” with “Program:” is more accurate.