This is why I do it.

You know how the surroundings are now and you don’t know how they are going to be when you have to drive out again. Makes sense to prepare for the unknown

By flawed I mean that there is a hierarchy where power consolidates at the top between a small number of humans. The reason why I call this a flaw is based on three premises:

1. My statement above about hierarchy of power consolidation
2. Power corrupts
3. Humans are inherently self serving. We protect ourselves and our own

As for China; take Hong Kong and or Tiananmen Square. Or something more straight forward; their conflict with Taiwan. They are pushing a narrative that Taiwan belongs to them, even though Taiwan clearly does not belong to them, which then reduces the statement to propaganda and an attempt to reframe what is true

To be clear, I favor communism as an idea. It’s just the implementations of the idea historically have been flawed. I don’t know anything about communistic subgroups. Take China for example; changing historic events by pushing an alternative “truth” is not focusing on facts. A list of books is a good indicator, but the contents of the books are also relevant

Yeah. Historic communism has the same problem as capitalism. People in unchecked power at the top. Doesn’t matter what ideology we follow if we refuse to fix root problems.

It’s also a problem that people love to gather around either worshipping or hating a certain individual, party or political direction. I wish people would focus more on the politics beneath, facts, statistics and causality

Just brain storming here:

You could expose a bare git repo on the server with a git hook that runs Docker compose up on push.

You could also have GitHub actions ssh in and run git pull && docker compose up on push to main.

Vim, plain text files and syncthing. Best combo I’ve found after years of searching

I’m saying identify the bugs through review, and fix them. Just do it in a new PR unless they are critical

Sorry about the confusion. It’s not sarcasm. I’m just sick and tired of people blocking my PR because of an argument about wether the function should be called X or Y or Z or D

Yeah, I see your point. Maybe my employers are different, it’s never been an issue explaining why the ticket isn’t closed just because the PR is merged

There’s often features and bug fixes worth more than the ones introduced in the PR. I’ve yet to see bug free code just because it’s went through review and QA.

I kind of with the sentiment. Review pre merge though, but only block the merge if there are serious faults. Otherwise, merge the code and have the author address issues after the merge. Get the value to production