I find it very difficult to recommend generative ai as a learning tool (specifically for juniors) as it often spits out terrible code (or even straight up not working) which could be mistaken as "good" code. I think the more experienced a dev is, the better it is to use more like a pair programmer.

The problem is it cannot go back and correct/improve already generated output unless prompted to. It is getting better and better, but it is still an overly glorified template generator, for the most part, that often includes import statements from packages that don't exist, one off functions that could have been inline (cannot go back and correct itself), and numerous garbage variables that are referenced only once and take up heap space for no seemingly no good reason.

Mainly speaking on GPT4, CoPilot is better, both have licensing concerns (of where did it get this code from) if you are creating something real and not for fun.

I have been using "gaming" keyboards for coding for ~10 years now. The only thing to be wary of imo, is keebs that have "extra customizable keys" on them and break conformity from a standard layout. Depends on the device, but Logitech will call them "G keys", for example, and often stick them on the far left of the board, left of tab/caps/L shift. Makes life a lot more difficult if not gaming.

Outside of that, I think calling something a "gaming" keyboard is more of a marketing tactic to up the price. It's hard to not recommend mechanical, but that sounds out of budget and often hard to do wireless/bluetooth, but personally I think mech is the top priority.

What I have seen a lot of peers do is wait to see whatever keyboard the get in office, then buy the same one for home for consistency, rather than dragging a personal one back and forth. Often companies will offer basic boards like logitech K270, K350, or K650. Not amazing, not terrible, and most likely fit in your described criteria.

Laughs in object

I am not as familiar with Cloud Native DevOps Newsletter but I do enjoy the podcast

December 8th, 2009 - Motorola Droid successfully rooted ... [granting] root access on the phone using a terminal emulator. This is how I learned bash which inevitably pushed me into pursuing proper Computer Science.

wiki ref

I believe in GitHub branch protection rules, you can set required review by a code owner, as well as set an amount of reviews required.

You are also able to structure codeowner files and assign codeowners to certain paths within the repo that they "own", rather than all or nothing.

You are able to set bypass rules for certain individuals, and as repo admin there is a little checkbox on PRs that will appear by default to allow you to ignore the requirements, although it is generally not recommended, but I won't harp on the reasons others have already pointed out.

disclaimer: I mainly work on a GHES instance, which may be function slightly different than public GH

December 8th, 2009 - Motorola Droid successfully rooted ... [granting] root access on the phone using a terminal emulator. This is how I learned bash which inevitably pushed me into pursuing proper Computer Science.

wiki ref

I prefer a similar workflow.

I am a major advocate of keeping CI as simple as possible, and letting build tools do the job they were built to do. Basic builds and unit/component testing. No need for overcomplicating things for the sake of "doing it all in one place".

CD is where things get dirty, and it really depends on how/what/where you are deploying.

Generally speaking, if integration testing with external systems is necessary, I like to have contract testing with these systems done during CI, then integration/e2e in an environment that mimics production (bonus points if ephemeral).

Just make sure to test the regex instead of blindly slapping it in assuming it works 🙂

Yes, I write SpringBoot microservices and IntelliJ plugins using Kotlin. Any new code is Kotlin, but there is still a ton of Java, which I don't consider "legacy", since it works, and if I can sanely add Kotlin when necessary, I don't see the need for "full rewrite".

You may get more traction by asking the Kotlin community

Thanks for sharing! I will need to look deeper into build kit. Containers aren't my main artifacts, unfortunately, so I am still building them the ways of old, sounds like.

Be really careful when building images that require secrets for build configuration. Secrets can be passed in as build args, but you MUST UNSET THEM IN THE DOCKERFILE and then repass them in as environment variables at runtime (or else you are leaking your secrets with your image).

Also, image != container. Image is the thing you publish to a registry (e.g. dockerhub). Container is an instance of an image.