Offloading responsibility for getting code through review to a manager or scrum master sounds at least as dysfunctional as people avoiding doing the reviews.

This is absolutely not true. If I can’t check in a fix or a feature because someone else isn’t doing the review, it’s definitely still my problem.

I used to run build call and this was the bane of my existence. People who just never engage (but pretend they are to get you to go away).

I don’t see that you addressed my concern at all, but perhaps there is a communication gap.

Regardless, good luck with your business.

As another commenter pointed out, this means if nothing else you pay an extra round trip to the DB. Allowing the DB to own the index moves that computation to the data and eliminate a round trip network cost. In general fetching some data from the DB to tell you what other data to fetch from the same DB is a poor design. SQL exists to solve this exact problem.

There are absolutely scenarios where scale is so large that you need a partition lookup service. But this is different from not using indices.

I can’t tell from the article if they were bidding on each others eggs or bidding on other farmers eggs and then canceling.

At least that is my understanding of the way the scale is managed.

> would be free with a real municipality

You can’t possibly be serious with this.

The fact that some HOAs are meddlesome neighbor havens doesn’t mean all of them are. (Though I agree with others here that the roles herein described belong to a municipality.)

I don’t know what the EU officially requires.

> having one person be in the right location

This is a strawman. I bet thousands at minimum of EU domains were registered in the UK.

If the intent is specifically to have a TLD for citizens and entities within the government’s scope, why should anyone outside that scope get to keep a domain? That is directly contradictory to the intent.

Governmental TLD’s are not supposed to be vanity domains that anyone can grab. That’s not the point.

> You cannot have both.

I can absolutely have both. The dev can make decisions that users don’t agree with. Users can express their willingness to leave or fork in response. And the choice to leave can absolutely be expressed as a threat.

You’re assuming a moral judgement in my statements that is simply not there. This is why I called your response knee jerk. You made an assumption instead of reading what I wrote (and clarified repeatedly).

Take care.

> it's very disruptive

Britain leaving the EU was very disruptive. I don’t see why the EU should alter their rules to accommodate British citizens. It doesn’t seem like responsibility of easing the disruption should fall at all to the EU when Britain created the disruption.

Maybe read the thread before knee-jerk responding.

You can disagree with my view on the situation, that’s fine. But I will decline to re-argue every point for you.

From the other side, why should the EU allow someone outside the EU to hold onto a domain that a person within the EU might want or benefit from?