Onomatopoeia

joined 4 weeks ago
[–] Onomatopoeia@lemmy.cafe 24 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Manufacturers want them - they break more easily

[–] Onomatopoeia@lemmy.cafe 2 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

I mean, yea, humanity gonna human.

But at least with fed, it's very easy to setup another instance and federate as you choose.

It will always be a shit show (again, humanity), but won't have a single (or even limited) central authority to censor as it chooses.

My concern will be it following the path of email - today many email providers simply block a lot, so if you're a new domain it's challenging to prevent getting on the block list.

[–] Onomatopoeia@lemmy.cafe 2 points 1 week ago

Damn, 5 years from LTS? That's impressive

[–] Onomatopoeia@lemmy.cafe 2 points 1 week ago

You monster! 😁

[–] Onomatopoeia@lemmy.cafe 5 points 1 week ago (4 children)

Spikes that fire a gun, or a gun that fires spikes?

[–] Onomatopoeia@lemmy.cafe 26 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Like that's a bad thing?

[–] Onomatopoeia@lemmy.cafe 3 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Documentation has been mentioned already, what I'd add to that is planning.

Start with a list of high-level objectives, as in "Need a way to save notes, ideas, documents, between multiple systems, including mobile devices".

Then break that down to high-level requirements such as "Implement Joplin, and a sync solution".

Those high-level requirements then spawn system requirements, such as Joplin needs X disk space, user accounts, etc.

Each of those branches out to technical requirements, which are single-line, single-task descriptions (you can skip this, it's a nice-to-have):

"Create folder Joplin on server A"

"Set folder permissions XYZ on Joplin folder"

Think of it all as a tree, starting from your objectives. If you document it like this first, you won't go doing something as you build that you won't remember why you're doing it, or make decisions on the fly that conflict with other objectives.

[–] Onomatopoeia@lemmy.cafe 4 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Yep.

I have friends in the SMB space, one thing they do is a regular backup verification (quarterly). At that frequency, restoring even a few files (especially to a new VM), is very indicative, especially if it's a large dataset (e.g. Quickbooks).

In Enterprise, we do all sorts of validation, depending on the system. Some is performed as part of Data Center operations, some is by IT (those are separate things), some by Business Unit management and their IT counterparts.

[–] Onomatopoeia@lemmy.cafe 1 points 1 week ago

Performance may be an issue. It's not specifically designed for streaming performance, and being a software VPN, it will depend a great deal on the devices used at each end.

[–] Onomatopoeia@lemmy.cafe 4 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (2 children)

Great summary!

Why Debian or Ubuntu? (I have my own thoughts, but it would be useful to show even high-level reasons why they're preferred).

Re: Backup - Backblaze has a great writeup on backup approach today. I'm a fan of cloud being part of the mix (I use a combo of local replication and cloud, to mitigate different risks). Getting people to include backup from the start will help them long-term, so great you included it!

[–] Onomatopoeia@lemmy.cafe 3 points 1 week ago

It's pretty obvious isn't it? 😁

[–] Onomatopoeia@lemmy.cafe 2 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Yea, it's always so shocking to me how little the weigh!

view more: ‹ prev next ›