Which benefits does EdgeDB have over Hasura which isn't built on top of PostgreSQL but as a layer that runs on top of it and exposes a GraphQL API along with access control, event triggers and other features?
The main advantages are EdgeQL and the Data Model.
EdgeQL is a fully featured query language, with support for subqueries, aggregation, transactions, rich datatypes like tuples/named tuples, arrays, JSON, etc.
The Data Model is object-relational, with support for multiple inheritance of object types and links between them. GraphQL really shines when it's used to query EdgeDB, it just feels natural.
That said, GraphQL can only do relatively simple queries, like "fetch me a hierarchy of objects with this shape with some basic filters". EdgeQL, on the other hand, allows you to build queries as advanced as what you can do with SQL.
Finally, there's only one schema in EdgeDB. You don't need to maintain a separate GraphQL schema, like you need to with hasura and other GraphQL solutions.
I would love to see the code open sourced! (it's ok if you have edge cases pending as long as they have been documented or at least mentioned in a README). Managing and running migrations smoothly without downtime is a very common challenge that a lot of startups face and I think a lot of us have been reinventing the wheel over and over to handle this due to the lack of current offerings.
Highly unrelated (and lots of reasons missing): I was never a fan of Gnome and for years ended up "just going with LXDE instead" until I gave Budgie a try about 6 months ago. I have never been happier in my life.
Check out https://dgraph.io/ . I haven't had the chance to use it yet, but I have been following its development for a while. Definitely worth looking into.
Not a lawyer here but would that fall under "profiting from the proceeds of crime"?
This article from Australia suggests it's illegal in that country, I wonder if it's the same in the US.
>Orders may also be made to seize the proceeds of the commercial exploitation of a person’s notoriety from criminal offending, literary or otherwise (but often described as “literary proceeds”).
I believe he was taken to court by the father of Ron Goldman, who won rights to the book. I'm not too familiar with the circumstances arouns the case, though, so this doesn't necessarily refute the idea that OJ could potentially have profited.
My understanding was that Goldman initially won a lien on the profits from the book, since Simpson owed Goldman money from the civil suit, and later the Goldman's where handed the book rights by the bankruptcy courts, when OJ failed to pay his debts.
So in theory OJ could have profited if he didn't also, independently, owe the Goldman's a lot of money.
Thanks for not letting Thunderbird die. In my opinion it's still the best and most customizable opensource email client and there is just not a viable replacement.
Most of the open source email clients I have tested require you to run a local webserver and access the mail using a web browser with very limited features. All I want/need is a desktop app that can be customized to work similar to Gmail, pulls and deletes emails from remote SMTP/IMAP servers and allows me to create backups locally.
It's been quite a while since I used it, but I recall Kmail being quite customizable. Indeed I actually remember it as being more customizable and had kind of been meaning to switch back to it from Thunderbird (but haven't actually done so because switching mail clients is a pain).
kmail is in terrible state and has been for while (can't even send text email by default for several weeks (months?). IINM a replacement is being developed and kmail is on life support until then.
Everything I've seen in the software industry suggests that these two qualities are at odds. The more config parameters there are, the more bugs and crap there will be. Unless by "best" you mean "most configurable" in which case, sure.
These days I run away from customizability. I'm actively choosing the least customizable software I can find.
Even though Mutt, Alpine, Sup and Notmuch might work great for some people they seem to be accessible only from a terminal, emacs, etc and very text heavy. As much as I love spending time on the terminal, I prefer a GUI app for my email.
Postbox unfortunately doesn't support Linux, besides that while I don't mind paying licences for great software, it doesn't look like Postbox is fully opensource [1].
BTW what makes you prefer GUI over text almost-GUI? My experience with email is that it's 99% text.
I use gmail because of the labels (no, folders are inadequate), full-text search, and the fact that it runs in browser which I keep always open anyway. I wish there was a comparable open-source solution.
> BTW what makes you prefer GUI over text almost-GUI? My experience with email is that it's 99% text.
For me it is the fact that setting up a GUI client takes 10 minutes and learning to use it even less. If it was the same with mutt, I would switch in a heartbeat.
I tried gnus and mutt in the past, but gave up on them after a few days. I was spending too much time tweaking the config, trying to remember shortcuts or googling how to get it to work the way I wanted to. IIRC even displaying Greek with an ok font was a problem on gnus. That was 10+ years ago, could be that the documentation is better now and a good-enough setup is easier to achieve.
My experience is that mutt is a tool which rewards the learning process with massively improved productivity.
By way of contrast, people who use Outlook or Thunderbird feel comfortable in ten minutes, but they never make much progress.
If you deal with a lot of email, using the right tools is important. If email is not your primary communications method, there's no point in putting in the time to learn more advanced tools.
I've been looking for ways to prevent it from opening tabs all around as this change to tabbed UX was forced upon users and confuses most of the people I maintain TB for, even to this day years later.
Is it customizable? That seems like a pretty strange question from someone that maintains it for a user base. Apart from "disabling" tabs what are you looking to customize? Having used TB since inception I might think a more apt question is "What can't you customize?".
I also don't think I understand your tab stance. You don't have to base your usage on tabs, do you? Personally, given the volume and types of mail I deal with, I was waiting for tabs for years. I just want the context menu option to "view message in conversation" to always exist. It dropped off a couple of builds ago and I can't seem to get it back. Usability of mail without this is decreased exponentially.
I don't understand how that changes anything about customization.
But I do understand the tab stance. When anything changes in UIs that directly affects the entire experience it is almost always a hurdle, for sure, no matter how savvy, no matter how willing.
