Share
Every Friday and Sunday, Slate’s popular daily news podcast What Next brings you TBD, a clear-eyed look into the future. From fake news to fake meat, algorithms to augmented reality, Lizzie O’Leary is your guide to the tech industry and the world it’s creating for us to live in.
…
continue reading
Manage episode 518060592 series 87197
Content provided by Steve Jones. All podcast content including episodes, graphics, and podcast descriptions are uploaded and provided directly by Steve Jones or their podcast platform partner. If you believe someone is using your copyrighted work without your permission, you can follow the process outlined here https://staging.podcastplayer.com/legal.
I wrote recently about some work with Redgate Clone, and one of the things I did was start up a blank container instance of SQL Server from the image named empty-sql-current. This image contains SQL Server 2019. Clearly, "current" was a poor choice.
I see this often in various places, where someone will reference "current", "new", "latest", or some other term that denotes the most recent changes. If everyone reading the reference is doing so with knowledge of the past and at a time close to publication, this works fine. However, a year later, does this make sense? At the same time, I do like consistent names that might be used in scripts. If I always want developers pulling the latest item, I might use latest. However, if versions are important, than "latest" or "current" might not be the best choice. Much of the time, I tend to try and get a version or some other specific indicator in a name.
Read the rest of Poor Name Choice
108 episodes
))
