• 0 Posts
  • 206 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 13th, 2023

help-circle
  • Amju Wolf@pawb.socialtoLinux@lemmy.mlGNOME 47.beta Released
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    I may understand “opinionated” differently from you, but the main issue is that when you do want to change something, you can’t. Or it’s some unsupported hack, or (best case) you flip some hidden configuration variable (that will probably break with the next release).

    KDE is well configured from the get go as well, you don’t have to change anything and it will work well. But if you do decide that you don’t like some of their defaults, you can tweak many aspects of it.


  • Amju Wolf@pawb.socialtoLinux@lemmy.mlGNOME 47.beta Released
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    It wouldn’t really be an issue if you didn’t need an extension for every single basic functionality…

    Because of how stupidly opinionated Gnome is I switched to KDE a year or so ago and have been extremely happy with it. And what do you know I don’t even need any extensions, because sane stuff like tray icons are builtin.

    I do use an extension for distributing windows in custom areas though, and it didn’t even break throughout the (I believe) 2 large updates there were since I started using it.


  • That’s never going to happen, and the reasons are twofold:

    Brands want to push their own style on people, to make themselves recognizable, and to push their ideas about UX to their users (because they obviously know better than the OS/DE/compositor/whatever people).

    It’s easier and cheaper to build a web app, because there are so many web developers. It also usually allows you to give an “app” to people who want that, while giving a (perhaps somewhat limited) browser version to everyone else, reaching the maximum amount of users while maintaining only a single codebase and keeping everything more or less cohesive and looking the same.




  • It’s funny because despite all the fearmongering about Microsoft’s Github acquisition it feels like it only improved since then, while Gitlab has done a shitton of questionable and shitty decisions, a ton of critical security issues and in general feels like (at best) they don’t know what they are doing.

    The only thing Gitlab has going for itself is that it’s self-hostable, but they still retain a large amount of control.





  • Yes, that’s one option. Then you only have to distribute the certificates and keys.

    Or you allow remote access to that DNS server (Bind has a secure protocol for this), do the challenge requests and cert generation on some other machine. Depends on what is more convenient for you (the latter is better if you have lots of machines/certs).

    Worst case if someone compromises that DNS server they can only generate certificates but not change your actual valuable records because these are not delegated there.


  • Life isn’t a zero sum game where you have to optimize material wealth. Some people do things for others just because they like doing it, because they have the means to do so, or because they simply want to help others.

    Sure, there are costs involved, but that’s true for literally everything if you account for opportunity cost. The vast majority of people choose to waste time completely unproductively, with no objective benefits to their lives (often with objective disadvantages), so is it hard to imagine that some people aren’t like that and instead choose to help/provide for others whole perhaps having some other non-material benefits like learning something or just becoming liked within a community?


  • What you can (and absolutely should) do is DNS delegation. On your main domain you delegate the _acme-challenge. subdomains with NS records to your DNS server that will do cert generation (and cert generation only). You probably want to run Bind there (since it has decent and fast remote access for changing records and other existing solutions). You can still split it with separate keys into different zones (I would suggest one key per certificate, and splitting certificates by where/how they will be used).

    You don’t even need to allow remote access beyond the DNS responses if you don’t want to, and that server doesn’t have anything to do with anything else in your infrastructure.