search for: grata

Hello all. Am relatively new to RoR and I am pondering how to do something without using components since they appear to be "coda non grata". I have a standard layout that is used by all controllers. In this layout I want to list the next 5 events that are upcoming based on todays date. These events are currently stored in the Event model (created using scaffolding). Currently only the Events controller accesses the Event mod...

...m( model, weights = wghts, data = cur.env ) > } > > prac3(model = y~x, wghts = rep(1, 10)) > > this is an equally 'good' 'solution', with the above comments equally applicable here. you'd have to tell the user of your modules which variable names are persona non grata. vQ

Estimados Alguno utiliza una alternativa a RStudio, últimamente no me gusta como funciona, por ejemplo, al cargar una archivo (abrirlo) se coloca como a ejecutar algo, la consola no marca nada, pero pasa el tiempo y el administrador de tareas de Windows 10 informa como va aumentando los megas de ram que consume, y aparecen mensajes de JavaScript en algunas oportunidades (lo instale otra vez a ver

It has just come to my notice that Redhat is planning to ship a forked version of OpenSSH. The change goes beyond the usual patches applied to RPMs in the build process: Redhat have built their own OpenSSH tarball and are using that in their source RPM instead of the official release distribution. If you are interested, have a look at the openssh-3.9p1-7.src.rpm from the Fedora development/

...comparación entre emacs, rstudio, notepad++. > > > se puede usar), donde hay partes que son mantenidas por Ubuntu, y ya est > faltan días), todos los sistemas tienen puntos fuertes y débiles respecto > a la experiencia de usuario, pienso que por el lado de bash podría haber > una grata sorpresa, o queda en nada, algo que me llama la atención es que R > y visual studio ya no se llevan (la versión estable no cita a R), aunque ya > está la beta de actualización (la última versión estable tiene unas dos > semanas). > > Lo que sí estoy convencido es que JavaScript es bu...

...VM > subprojects that are version-locked to other projects but you think do > not meet these criteria, and therefore you want to exclude them from > the monorepo. Is that right? lldb comes to mind, as it wasn't in > your list above. > > I understand that lldb is persona non grata in some circles. But. > It's not right to use the source code migration as a tool to revisit > an old decision like this. That is procedurally unjust. The relevant > decision should be, "is LLDB an LLVM subproject that is version-locked > to other subprojects, or not?” I re...

...ked to other projects but you think do >>> not meet these criteria, and therefore you want to exclude them from >>> the monorepo. Is that right? lldb comes to mind, as it wasn't in >>> your list above. >>> >>> I understand that lldb is persona non grata in some circles. But. >>> It's not right to use the source code migration as a tool to revisit >>> an old decision like this. That is procedurally unjust. The relevant >>> decision should be, "is LLDB an LLVM subproject that is version-locked >>> to o...

> On Jul 28, 2016, at 12:59 AM, Renato Golin via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > On 28 Jul 2016 8:36 a.m., "David Chisnall via llvm-dev" <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>> wrote: > > This does not apply to libc++. We support building the entire LLVM suite with other C++ standard library implementations (at

...that are version-locked to other projects but you think do >> not meet these criteria, and therefore you want to exclude them from >> the monorepo. Is that right? lldb comes to mind, as it wasn't in >> your list above. >> >> I understand that lldb is persona non grata in some circles. But. >> It's not right to use the source code migration as a tool to revisit >> an old decision like this. That is procedurally unjust. The relevant >> decision should be, "is LLDB an LLVM subproject that is version-locked >> to other subprojects...

...ked to other projects but you think do >>> not meet these criteria, and therefore you want to exclude them from >>> the monorepo. Is that right? lldb comes to mind, as it wasn't in >>> your list above. >>> >>> I understand that lldb is persona non grata in some circles. But. >>> It's not right to use the source code migration as a tool to revisit >>> an old decision like this. That is procedurally unjust. The relevant >>> decision should be, "is LLDB an LLVM subproject that is version-locked >>> to o...

...that are version-locked to other projects but you think do >> not meet these criteria, and therefore you want to exclude them from >> the monorepo. Is that right? lldb comes to mind, as it wasn't in >> your list above. >> >> I understand that lldb is persona non grata in some circles. But. >> It's not right to use the source code migration as a tool to revisit >> an old decision like this. That is procedurally unjust. The relevant >> decision should be, "is LLDB an LLVM subproject that is version-locked >> to other subprojects...

Hi Duncan, > […] > 2. Those working on projects *outside* the monolithic repo will get the downsides of both: a monolithic repo that they are only using parts of, and multiple repos that are somehow version-locked. > > 3. For many (most?) developers, changing to a monolithic git repo is a *bigger* workflow change than switching to separate git repos. Many people (and at least some