"""
Queen Elizabeth II was the first of Canada's sovereigns to be proclaimed separately as Queen of Canada in 1953, when a Canadian law, the Royal Style and Titles Act, formally conferred upon her the title of "Queen of Canada". The proclamation reaffirmed the monarch’s role in Canada as independent of the monarch’s role in the United Kingdom and other Commonwealth realms.
"""
JJ has first-class support for conflicted trees, changesets, branches, and operations. The op log itself is a (really useful) feature not present in Git.
You can always end up with the same set of published commits, guaranteed. But the tools you have for manufacturing them and for interacting with their history definitely include things that are possible in JJ but not in Git.
JJ has the concept of "immutable changesets" -- if it sees a commit is referenced from a branch that it's not tracking, it assumes it ought not rebase that commit. Changesets on branches that look like the main branch are immutable too. And you can edit the revset that JJ considers immutable if you need it to be different from the default.
The net effect is that I can change "my" branches as I wish, but I can't change stuff that's been merged or other folks' branches unless I disable the safety features (either using `--ignore-immutable` or tracking the branch).
JJ also makes it really easy to push a single changeset as a branch, which means as you evolve that single commit you can keep the remote updated with your current work really easily. And it's got a specific `jj evolog` command to see how a specific changeset has evolved over time.
I configured my Markdown renderer to replace ` -- ` with " — ". Hopefully those narrow spaces make it through HN's rendering — it's much easier when your tooling can do the job for you.
Americans complaining about extra-territorial application of laws?
As much as I dislike the OSA, if you're not in the UK you can -- and probably should -- just ignore it. Unless you care specifically about interacting with users or businesses in the UK, in which case you probably need to comply.
Unlike the USA, we're generally incapable of successfully demanding everyone everywhere go along with whatever overreach we might think up.
> Unlike the USA, we're generally incapable of successfully demanding everyone everywhere go along with whatever overreach we might think up.
I can understand why someone might think the UK still has as much influence as it did 50-75 years ago when you consider how prevalent that "UKCA" symbol is (the one that was introduced to replace the "CE" mark post-Brexit).
I'm sure the companies who put effort into adopting UKCA were really happy to have put in that effort :P. Even if it's I hope not as onerous as adopting it (or CE) from scratch, as they both have quite similar (if not originally identical?) requirements. It seemed more intended to give the impression of Brexit success than of actually making a difference to anything.
You say that, but it happens — "Experts Exchange", for example, certainly used to try to hide the answers from users who hadn't paid while encouraging search engines to index them.
That's not quite the same. Experts Exchange wanted the content publicly searchable, and explicitly allowed search engines to index it. In this case, many customers probably aren't aware that there is a separate search index that contains much of the data in their private documents that may be searchable and accessible by entities that otherwise shouldn't have access.
Russia requires a physical presence for services offered in-country, and also Amazon won't provision certificates for .ru domains, so it's not all that surprising they don't host a very high proportion of .ru.
That's just excuses that ignore the fact that AWS was never popular even before any of these restrictions came about.
Many of the providers on those lists are older than AWS, and/or have been in business for many years since before 2010, many for 20 years or more, long before the data sovereignty concerns went mainstream all around the world in the last 10 years.
What counts as "SPA" and what's an "MPA"? I've got a NextJS site (my personal website, you can probably find it given you know my last name and that I'm in the UK) that renders pretty much everything server-side. Technically it's still an SPA because if you turn on Javascript it'll load RSC and do client-side navigation.
If you turn off Javascript? Pages with client-only components (like the 100% client-rendered QR code generator) will show their fallback, everything else will load and render perfectly -- if a little less quickly -- than if you let Next do its thing. It's all rendered into the HTML, and it's actually more effort to not render components on the server. Progressive enhancement for the win!
https://testcontainers.com/ is not quite the solution to all your problems, but it makes working with real databases and supporting services pretty much as easy as mocking them would be.
I'd really recommend against mocking dependencies for most tests though. Don't mock what you don't own, do make sure you test each abstraction layer appropriately.
Reference: https://www.canada.ca/en/canadian-heritage/services/crown-ca...
""" Queen Elizabeth II was the first of Canada's sovereigns to be proclaimed separately as Queen of Canada in 1953, when a Canadian law, the Royal Style and Titles Act, formally conferred upon her the title of "Queen of Canada". The proclamation reaffirmed the monarch’s role in Canada as independent of the monarch’s role in the United Kingdom and other Commonwealth realms. """
reply