The point of the license combination they use is to allow the enterprise version to be open and live in the same repo as everything else. Dunno if that’s what they do, but that’s why the elastic license exists.

The only surefire way is to read it all. And understand it all. That ain’t happening though. So you decide how much to do.

You should figure out how many people are landing patches and get a rough sense of why. Same for folks filing issues or talking about the project in general. Maybe you trust one of the contributors for some reason. Either way, you want to know how alive the project is.

You could land a patch.

You could spot check parts of the code.

You could run vulnerability scanners on it.

I dunno. It’s hard.

I’m not sure I’d attach any meaning to real names online. There’s a whole group of us whose online names are just things they thought were neat when they were 12. And they’ve just stuck forever. There’s lot of reasons.

But otherwise, yeah. I’ll spend ten minutes looking up someone’s online profile. Mostly for GitHub if I can find it. If someone’s commenting on public prs and seems nice that’s a big signal.

I agree. Light touch until you have a bunch of changes landed.

I was a professional open source contributor for a while. Still have the same job, but the license changed. Culture still quite similar though.

I review a ton of code and have a bunch reviewed in turn. I don’t remember that last time I’ve had this come up. Either direction really. I guess I’m lucky. We just split naturally in similar places.

I think it’s a bad analogy because it’ll distract some people.

I believe they were referring to this: https://youtu.be/9eyFDBPk4Yw?si=sb_v_EPhTM9C6bZZ

I imagine a delta encoding scheme similar to what the time series DBs use would work well for the geo points. Maybe even a delta-of-delta encoding for things like ships which move very consistently.

It’s probably not worth it given how small they’ve already go their data. But it is fun.

I don’t believe Prometheus supports geospatial data. Two minutes of googling though, so I could be wrong.

Sorry. I wasn’t clear. If the conditional is constant a compile time you get the dead code optimization. The path not taken is removed. If it’s not constant at you may get the loop invariant movement. But only if the compiler can tell that it’s invariant.

My point wasn’t that you should always rely on this behavior. At least, I didn’t mean to say that. I suppose what I should have said is more like “in many cases you won’t see any performance difference because the compiler will do that for you anyway.”

I suppose I have value judgements around that like “generally you should do the thing that is more readable and let the compiler take care of stuff like moving the loop invariant”. That’s been mostly true for me. But only mostly.

I don’t believe you have to specify the condition at compile time. I think that optimization would fall under dead code elimination.

For the invariant code motion stuff the comparison just has to be invariant from start to finish. At least, that’s been my experience. The compiler will just shift the if stement.

But, like, there are totally times when it can’t figure out that the thing is invariant. And sometimes it’s just more readable to move the if statement out of the loop.

I’m reasonably sure compilers can shift the if out. I believe it’s called “loop invariant code motion”. Won’t work in call cases, but in the variable case it should.

We ask algorithm questions and I feel bad about it. But a nontrivial portion of the job really is adapting these algorithms to novel scenarios. Not most of the job, but maybe the hardest part.

I use it for work so to entirely leave it they’d have to move away. That seems unlikely.