firdaus

With Temporal/Cadence you write (mostly) plain code to implement your business logic rather than using code to define DAGs.

This discussion has more on Airflow vs Cadence: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19732447

Looks nice!

I'm working on something similar but without the pretty UI (built on top of https://cadenceworkflow.io/) - https://github.com/firdaus/cadence-python

I have this problem, we could have a lot of branches but only a certain number of environments e.g. dev, qa, stage etc.. So would this tool allow me to create environments dynamically so that I can test each branch standalone.

Yeah I just saw your producthunt post and I guess you get that a lot, I'll give it a try on a future project.

Looks similar to https://www.milanote.com/

package.json says it is MIT licensed but there is no LICENSE file

Google Desktop Search

- glitch (the game) - Ubuntu Linux with Unity - Posterous - Ducksboard

Kara and Nate - Travel vloggers

Pailin's Kitchen - Breaks Down Thai Recipes into easy to follow steps

Team CoCo - Remotes are hilarious

25K to be exact

https://www.cncf.io/blog/2017/02/06/cncf-purchases-rethinkdb...

Can you state your stance on AGPL[1] on the website like MongoDB and RethinkDB do to put people's minds at ease.

[1] https://github.com/deepstreamIO/deepstream.io/issues/298

Sounds a bit like what http://fluidinfo.com/ wanted to do originally.

I found this particularly interesting - https://www.firebase.com/docs/security/custom-login.html - since it allows you to integrate with existing apps.

Are there any other BAAS providers that have something similar?

In a way, I think it's better for open source projects that need money to go the AGPL route. The way I see it with pledging is that you'd be getting companies that are already donating/contributing back to open source projects. Whether this will be more or less than what they're already contributing remains to be seen.

I don't work for them. Just intrigued by the job title and ad.

Even if it's harmless, I don't think it's his place to make a decision about whether electronic interference is dangerous to the plane's equipment or not and affect the safety of everyone else on board. The steward on the other hand is completely justified in enforcing/following the airline's (industry?) policy.

Paying for first class doesn't give you the right to compromise the safety of the flight.

I've always thought that that was a benefit of unit testing and high code coverage - knowing when a change has broken some other piece of code.