Or maybe don't use AUR blindly? You're doing the equivalent of `sudo curl

| bash`. Who knows what the script is doing. So only do it if you truly trust it. That's why we have warnings plastered all over. That's also why a warning label and sticker exists. And this is precisely the reason easy no user input AUR helpers are greatly discouraged

That size is the issue I think

If I copy paste a malicious script here and you run it without knowing/checking what it do, do you think your instance admin should also put more rules and restrictions for the whole instance? AUR is no different than github or pastebin. It is on the user to vet what script they are running. Arch already has a more strict and vetted repo by the maintainer. Having AUR be a vetted place has no real good solution because of easy botting.

Better than bricking your installation like a certain desktop OS

Offline cache becomes possible with PWA

Edit to give concrete example: Mozilla MDN docs read later/read while offline

I was wrong. It was not mozilla MDN. But I do remember an offline cache docs site

Naah, I do not have imaginary conversation. Those are what many people I speak on some discord server actually say when they talk about the web being too complex. While they used discord. And many people at that. That's why I jump to the assumptions, my bad then.

I assume you are one of those people that wants the web to go back to the 2000 era. Where JS is not as wide spread and multimedia is expensive to load. That's why I assume if you want the web to be simpler you advocate for removing many of the current web standards/API. I meet too many people like that hence my immediate assumption

The alternative to a less complex web is we will have more native applications. And honestly, I do not prefer that

What happened to one tool that does one thing well? If deno wanted to have HMR and all the good stuff the author mentioned, then Deno, with however much the maintainer count is, MUST prioritize and make compromise. But with every tool being a separate project, it is easier to make changes and to gather maintainer because of how broad range the tool application is compared to a single monolithic tool.

However, we do see a difference in Bun approach. It brings ALL the good stuff Deno does AND compatibility with Node from the get go. So the developer of course would flock there. Because the tooling works. Ironing out kinks of the tool is much easier than entirely severing compatibility in the name of progress.

More people needs to know about Vite PWA project. It will generate the service worker for you and still provide the escape hatch if you ever need to write it your own too!

A well thought out software architecture is indeed worth a lot. So a group of engineers that are able to actually make accurate architecture and decisions from the get go would help a lot. But the problem is requirement changes. And that's the core issue.

For something relatively set in stone like a car control system for ICE timing and whatnot, the requirement will not change by the fact that it is tied to another design which must also have been fixed beforehand and cannot be changed easily mid way willy nilly like software.

The engineer designing the engine must do a lot of administrative tasks again to make sure they pass every regulation under the sun when a change is made. We, the software guy does not have the equivalent of those barrier when a service requirement change. At most it is something about data privacy and security but that's about it. Everything else is fair game

Lemmy sure loves swallowing my reply. To answer your question shortly is an offline first app where the user can add records and the relation during offline and then sync it later after connection is re-established.