Speaker 1: How'd you like to listen to dot net rocks with
Speaker 1: no ads? Easy? Become a patron for just five dollars
Speaker 1: a month. You get access to a private RSS feed
Speaker 1: where all the shows have no ads. Twenty dollars a month,
Speaker 1: we'll get you that and a special dot net Rocks
Speaker 1: patron mug. Sign up now at Patreon dot dot NetRocks
Speaker 1: dot com. Welcome back to dot net rocks. Where back
Speaker 1: on Terra Firma. I am anyway in my house. I'm
Speaker 1: Carl Franklin, and Richard is on the road and you're aware.
Speaker 2: I'm in Haldmun, the Netherlands, okay for a user group
Speaker 2: talk before I fly home tomorrow. But I've been, you know.
Speaker 2: We did Orlando at DEVENU session, then over to Lisbon
Speaker 2: for as your Dev Summit. Then I went and did TDC,
Speaker 2: which is a Trondheim Developer conference in Trondheim, Norway, and
Speaker 2: then down to Hello Stavanger in Stavanger, Norway and hung
Speaker 2: out with Alan Henderson. And then this week was tech
Speaker 2: O Rama and Utrecht and me.
Speaker 1: I went to Orlando and I came home and then
Speaker 1: I went on a cruise with a bunch of TV
Speaker 1: chefs cool yeah, and was that fun. It was so
Speaker 1: much fun. And just walking down the hallway and running
Speaker 1: into like Mark Murphy and Alex Cornaschelley and Andrew Zimmer
Speaker 1: and Alton Brown. Just really cool.
Speaker 2: That's awesome.
Speaker 1: The Norwegian cruise line boat food suck. Oh no, yes,
Speaker 1: but the restaurants were pretty good. But like the general
Speaker 1: buffet where everybody feeds at the trough, oh my god,
Speaker 1: just horrible, no flavor, no, you know, just just bulk food, nasty.
Speaker 1: It's funny. But the restaurants were great. And the chef's
Speaker 1: we're taking over the restaurants and serving their own dishes,
Speaker 1: and that was really cool.
Speaker 2: That's really fun. Yeah.
Speaker 1: All right, so let's talk about because this is episode
Speaker 1: nineteen seventy five, let's talk about what happened that year.
Speaker 1: I'll start so politically, Vietnam War is over, yeah I
Speaker 1: think it is. The US embassy is evacuated in Cambodia.
Speaker 1: Is the Kamara Rouge advanced on Non ten?
Speaker 2: Oh right, yeah, now we get to the killing fields.
Speaker 1: Yeah. There were two assassination attempts on Cherald Ford, President
Speaker 1: Gerald Ford, both of which failed.
Speaker 2: In culture Jaws, Oh man, dude, Steven Spielberg's big hit.
Speaker 1: Right, still a great You know, I think more people
Speaker 1: are afraid to watch Jaws than like Friday the Thirteenth.
Speaker 2: You're probably right.
Speaker 1: But the fact of the matter is it's not a
Speaker 1: gory movie. It's just a tense movie.
Speaker 2: Well it's that music is killing, right, John Williams Man,
Speaker 2: John Williams made it.
Speaker 1: So some other movies Dog Day Afternoon, One Flew Over
Speaker 1: the Cuckoo's Nest were released next year. It gets really
Speaker 1: really awesome for movies and TV. Wheel of Fortune premiered
Speaker 1: and Saturday Night Live debuted Wheel of Fortune in January,
Speaker 1: Saturday Night Live in October. Okay, now to the things
Speaker 1: that matter to us. Microsoft was founded.
Speaker 2: There you go Albuquerque, Paul.
Speaker 1: Allen and Bill Gates, the Pat Rock mood rings, popular trends,
Speaker 1: the first black manager in Major League Baseball Frank Robinson. Nice,
Speaker 1: definite milestone there in the first black golfer in the Masters,
Speaker 1: Lee Elder Way to go.
Speaker 2: Yeah, progress, Yeah, So.
Speaker 1: Do you have anything in science and tech a space
Speaker 1: that you want to talk about in nineteen seventy five.
Speaker 2: Well, I mean you mentioned Microsoft, of course, and that's
Speaker 2: also because the Altar eighty eight hundred had finally been released.
Speaker 2: It was in the magazine in nineteen seventy four and
Speaker 2: we mentioned it there, but now it's actually available for
Speaker 2: sale in January. Yeah. Also released in nineteen seventy five
Speaker 2: is the sixty five oh two processor. Wow made my motorola,
Speaker 2: So the one that will show up in the Apple
Speaker 2: two in the sixty four Even the NES was actually
Speaker 2: powered by sixty five oh two. And in nineteen seventy
Speaker 2: five you could buy a sixty five oh two processor
Speaker 2: for twenty five dollars.
Speaker 1: Wow, and because who needs those things? Yeah?
Speaker 2: And in video game history, nineteen seventy five is the
Speaker 2: year that the Colossal Cave Adventure is written. Wow, running
Speaker 2: on a running on a mini computer, written by Will Crowther.
Speaker 2: This is the famous It is dark and you're likely
Speaker 2: to be eaten by a groove or you're in a
Speaker 2: twisty maze of passages all alike. Yeah, that's that's that.
Speaker 2: That becomes Zork many years later. But the original version
Speaker 2: is cle.
Speaker 1: Yes, so these are like the Infocom text adventure games.
Speaker 2: Right well before that. Yeah, Infocom you know use that
Speaker 2: the Temple Colossal Cave is the level. This is the
Speaker 2: original original original.
Speaker 1: Did I hear in the news that EA got bought.
Speaker 2: EA has gone private. Electronics no longer a publicly held company. Yeah,
Speaker 2: they got they're now gone private. We'll see what that represents.
Speaker 2: But a conglomerate of organizations, including some Saudi entities, have
Speaker 2: taken it private.
Speaker 1: Yeah.
Speaker 2: Over on the space side, two sets of missions that
Speaker 2: I think are very important. The Viking Margelanders launched this year,
Speaker 2: but we'll talk about them next to you in the
Speaker 2: next show when they land, because that's what the get cool.
Speaker 2: But the Soviets flew Venera nine and ten, launched in June,
Speaker 2: landed in October, and sent the first images from the
Speaker 2: surface of another planet. The Viking will do that from Mars,
Speaker 2: but it won't. It will happen later. And of course
Speaker 2: this is this is Venus we're talking about, so temperatures
Speaker 2: so hot it melt lead and raining sulfur, dioxides, all
Speaker 2: that fluff. It's like dangerous there. And so while they
Speaker 2: make it to the surface, they do not last very long,
Speaker 2: just a few hours, and then they're destroyed by the
Speaker 2: forces that are under them. Any more important. In July
Speaker 2: of nineteen seventy five, the Joint Apollo so Use mission.
Speaker 2: So this was an Apollo capsule and a Soyused capsule
Speaker 2: meeting up in space basically to do a handshake.
Speaker 1: So back when America and Russia liked each other.
Speaker 2: Well they really didn't, and this was a big deal
Speaker 2: was trying to deal with. This is the middle of
Speaker 2: the Cold War and they're trying to find a way forward.
Speaker 2: But there was a lot of stuff for the hoops
Speaker 2: they had to jump through. One. You know, the Soviet
Speaker 2: designs and the American designs were very different from each other.
Speaker 2: Soviet designs were very much automated. The cosmonauts did not
Speaker 2: operate the machine much. It was flown from the ground
Speaker 2: and that was concerning, and they didn't have a lot
Speaker 2: of redundancy. If something failed, they were supposed to abort
Speaker 2: the mission. That was the point, either everything works or stop.
Speaker 2: Where Apollo was very could be hand flown. There was
Speaker 2: definitely a crew in charge of the vehicle, multiple redundancies,
Speaker 2: so things could break and they could switch over. So
Speaker 2: it was a challenge there. But here was the real problem.
Speaker 2: The docking systems not only were different, but they were
Speaker 2: what we call probe and drogue. That is to say,
Speaker 2: there is a probe but a sticky outbit that has
Speaker 2: to go into a drogue and any bit, and neither
Speaker 2: side wanted to be the any bit. See any childish
Speaker 2: male behavior here, Yeah, so uh never changes. The solution
Speaker 2: was was called the androgynoust peripheral attached system, which by
Speaker 2: the way is actually a better solution where both sides
Speaker 2: coupled exactly the same way, so you don't have to
Speaker 2: match up the pairs, right. The problem with probe and
Speaker 2: drogue is what if you got two vehicles and both
Speaker 2: that probes on them, you can't dock. So this was
Speaker 2: the beginning of a universal adapter system that is what
Speaker 2: is used everywhere then on. But the other issue here
Speaker 2: was that the atmospheres in the capsules were different the APO.
Speaker 2: The APOLLO system used five psi of pure oxygen in
Speaker 2: the cabin, where the SOU system used fifteen psi like
Speaker 2: normal atmosphere pressure of nitrogen oxygen combination, and so they
Speaker 2: you couldn't match them up.
Speaker 1: Right, So you had to have like a holding area
Speaker 1: between the two.
Speaker 2: That's right. So the androgenous perphil attached system was not
Speaker 2: only a neutral docking system where two probes could dock
Speaker 2: into it. So everybody got to be a probe, but
Speaker 2: also provided a common atmosphere for that. Now, the SOUS
Speaker 2: also opened the pod bay doors. Holl that's it. So
Speaker 2: the Sous actually modified their system to reduce their pressure
Speaker 2: down to ten psi tapsule, which made things a little
Speaker 2: bit simpler. But yeah, they would climb into this locker
Speaker 2: between the two in the in the apaths and that's
Speaker 2: where they were able to shake hands and so forth,
Speaker 2: mixing the atmospherees.
Speaker 1: Wow, that's cool. So this is like I just want
Speaker 1: to talk about software, man.
Speaker 2: But there you go. There there's a history bit.
Speaker 1: This is super That was really cool and I'm glad
Speaker 1: we're doing this. All right, Well, let's get started here, started,
Speaker 1: I say, but let's move on with better no framework,
Speaker 1: roll the music.
Speaker 2: Awesome, boar man, what you got?
Speaker 1: So about three years ago, episode eighteen eighteen, we did
Speaker 1: a show at NDC making open source work for Everyone
Speaker 1: with David Whitney.
Speaker 2: Remember that, Yeah, I remember, published late in the year
Speaker 2: and a lot of f bombs dropped as I recall.
Speaker 1: Oh, yeah, yeah, there was some anger there and you
Speaker 1: know a lot of the well, one big issue that
Speaker 1: we honed in on was how do we incentivize open
Speaker 1: source project maintainers to continue without compensation, right, yeah, I
Speaker 1: think one of the things. I don't know if I
Speaker 1: suggested it or you did, or one of us said,
Speaker 1: you know, there should be something built in a new
Speaker 1: get where you could contribute right right there when you
Speaker 1: download the package, you should be given an option. Hey,
Speaker 1: you want to contribute to this project. Well, it turns
Speaker 1: out that's a thing now, Yay. Sponsorship on new GAT
Speaker 1: is a thing that's cool. And there's an article that
Speaker 1: we're going to link to announcing sponsorship on NEWCATA that
Speaker 1: shows how it works.
Speaker 2: I think it's just easier for people to support the
Speaker 2: projects they depend on. I check. Yeah, I like that
Speaker 2: a lot. Yeah, awesome, dude, nice find.
Speaker 1: Yep, that's it. That's what I got. So we're moving forward. Yeah,
Speaker 1: one step at a time. So who's talking to us today?
Speaker 1: Richard and grabbed a comment of Show nineteen seventy one.
Speaker 1: Just a few shows ago, our friend Egle Hanson talking
Speaker 1: a little about valuable testing. I just saw him at
Speaker 1: the conferences as well, and this was where we were
Speaker 1: talking about testing approaches and systems for making effective tests, right,
Speaker 1: Like that was all about it's like it's just testing
Speaker 1: that makes your system more reliable, more valuable. And our
Speaker 1: friend our Dallas, that's Steve Smith commented where said we
Speaker 1: were talking about naming strategies around testing, and so he said,
Speaker 1: for organizing a naming test, I'm a fan of following
Speaker 1: SRP or single responsibility paradigms.
Speaker 2: With test classes. What this generally looks like is a
Speaker 2: test class per method being tested. This gets rid of
Speaker 2: classes that end with the name tests, although you may
Speaker 2: certainly have a folder called class test that holds individual
Speaker 2: test classes one per method being tested. Names of the
Speaker 2: test classes should be some class, some method. Then put
Speaker 2: it underscore in there if you like, and your casing
Speaker 2: is up to you. Name the individual test scenario being tested,
Speaker 2: such as if you read the class name followed by
Speaker 2: the method name, it would describe a use case for
Speaker 2: the expectation. So calculator ad return some gives two integers
Speaker 2: or calculator ad throws given null argument. Now with some
Speaker 2: test fail, it's clear to anyone technical or not which
Speaker 2: use cases failed.
Speaker 1: You know, Steve doesn't like set standards no but for everybody,
Speaker 1: but I love his suggestions. They always make a lot
Speaker 1: of sense. He's a thoughtful man, there's no twoice about it.
Speaker 2: Saw him too at the conference as usual, you know,
Speaker 2: soft spoken, thoughtful. You got to listen carefully and you'll
Speaker 2: learn some things. And I suspect he already has a
Speaker 2: copy of Music to code By it.
Speaker 1: I know he is.
Speaker 2: Yeah, thank you so much for you're comment at a
Speaker 2: copy of music Go By. He's on its way to you.
Speaker 2: And if you'd like a copy of music Go buy,
Speaker 2: write a comment on the website dot at Rocks dot
Speaker 2: com or on the Facebook to publish every show there
Speaker 2: and if you comment there at reading the show, we'll
Speaker 2: tell your copy of us to go.
Speaker 1: I think Steve is one of the first contributors to
Speaker 1: that project, and he uses music to code By. I
Speaker 1: think he was the one who says to soothe his
Speaker 1: agitated dogs so they can go to sleep.
Speaker 2: That's cool, that's a good idea.
Speaker 1: Yeah, all right, well let's move on here. It's Mattias Carlson.
Speaker 1: He's back, or Mattias, I think we call you right,
Speaker 1: that's correct. Yes, a friend of ours from Sweden. He's
Speaker 1: a senior architect and partner at w com or Yeah,
Speaker 1: I think that's it. In Gothenburg, Sweden over twenty five
Speaker 1: years of professional experience software development, Microsoft Developer Technologies MVP,
Speaker 1: and the dot net and DevOps categories. He's also deeply
Speaker 1: involved in the dot net open source community and is
Speaker 1: probably most known there as one of the lead maintainers
Speaker 1: of the dot Net Foundation project Cake And you thought
Speaker 1: it was just for dessert?
Speaker 3: Aesome, that's the point I want to bring cake and people.
Speaker 1: Welcome back, Matias, thank you.
Speaker 3: Let's be good to be back.
Speaker 2: Awesome. All right, what have you been up to, friend, presumer?
Speaker 2: Your cake centric? Is you're very cake browne.
Speaker 1: Well yeah, let's just start with refresh our memories about cake.
Speaker 3: Yeah. So Cake is a cross platform, cross environment, cross service,
Speaker 3: open source built orchestra and framework and.
Speaker 1: It's not very ambitious, just a little slice of Yeah.
Speaker 3: But that's why I like, it's hard time time to explain.
Speaker 3: But we've been around for a while, yeah, yeah, since
Speaker 3: twenty fourteen, and today, like what we're probably going to
Speaker 3: talk a little about is like in May this year
Speaker 3: we dot not pre before Micro just launched that you
Speaker 3: will now be able to just dot not and a
Speaker 3: c shop file because that has never been done before.
Speaker 3: And I was like, hey, hey, that's what's Kate been
Speaker 3: doing for for almost eleven years. Now we'll essentially be
Speaker 3: able to put your C short code in one script
Speaker 3: file and have a script drunner to do it. And
Speaker 3: instead of yelling on internet and social media like they
Speaker 3: stole our idea or whatever, I have throll over. The
Speaker 3: punches are like, oh, I can throw away a lot
Speaker 3: of code and this is like a perfect fit for Cake,
Speaker 3: which means we're going to introduce KK SDK.
Speaker 2: So interesting. So what does it mean to you have
Speaker 2: a Cake SDK, Well.
Speaker 3: It's okay. We ever had the Shop DSL which was
Speaker 3: the script runner, We had the Frosting which was a
Speaker 3: console application. Now we will have a Cake SDK, and
Speaker 3: that means that we have moved everything that was code
Speaker 3: generation wise in the script runner. We have moved it
Speaker 3: into an regular dot STKA package, which means essentially you
Speaker 3: can just do a single C. Shop Virus is a
Speaker 3: new support dot K and we will bring all the
Speaker 3: goodness of Cake by just adding an STK reference to
Speaker 3: to your product. Because with a new project less files
Speaker 3: the support for does not SK. They have a couple
Speaker 3: of pre prepotal directors. You can have things like SDKs,
Speaker 3: MS built properties, packages, projects, and things like that, which
Speaker 3: means for us has been really good because then we
Speaker 3: will get things like vis code support out of the box,
Speaker 3: which has been the pain point for us sometimes because
Speaker 3: we had all on language server for Cake because we
Speaker 3: added out shually. So this will mean a lot of
Speaker 3: good things for us, I think.
Speaker 1: Right, So, what's a typical scenario where a developer might
Speaker 1: feel the need to use something like Cake if they're
Speaker 1: just trying to use them as builder, they're having a
Speaker 1: particularly difficult build, what would what would be the complexity
Speaker 1: of their situation?
Speaker 3: Well, I think the main scenario is like if you
Speaker 3: have more than your dot not pack, if you're a
Speaker 3: scenario has something more on that. But also if you
Speaker 3: want something like usually today we have all all the
Speaker 3: cis have Jamo yeah, I hate it, and jammal is
Speaker 3: get get like everything you get one space wrong and
Speaker 3: like usually the flow is well, I open a text file,
Speaker 3: yammo file, right, I enter a few esoteric tasks that
Speaker 3: are better than it used to be with us, and
Speaker 3: they still it's it's source control is where you can
Speaker 3: follow what happens here.
Speaker 1: You're preaching the choir mane.
Speaker 3: That's that's like you have something that's more like an engineer,
Speaker 3: Like you have something that's in source control is version,
Speaker 3: but it has no discoverability and you have lack everything
Speaker 3: of a real program language. And that's the advantage if there's
Speaker 3: something like it, which is c sharp, is that you
Speaker 3: have things like, oh, I can use I can to
Speaker 3: take one string and concatenect with other in a language
Speaker 3: I know. I don't have to look it up somewhere
Speaker 3: because has there Jamal and National DevOps as their Jamal
Speaker 3: and GIT clubs as their Jammal. But here with Kate,
Speaker 3: you get one sea sharp the sea shop you used daily,
Speaker 3: and you get a set of we call them alysses
Speaker 3: to get a set of methods that are strongly type
Speaker 3: static methods for things like dot m bield or dot pack,
Speaker 3: or we have all these set of methods to work
Speaker 3: for the file system like clean directories, or you can
Speaker 3: do I want to copy files, I want to sip files.
Speaker 3: All those are strongly typed C sharp methods and they
Speaker 3: have strongly type parameters. You don't need to do like, oh,
Speaker 3: what is this version parameter? It's a string or is
Speaker 3: it an int or whatever is it? We will have
Speaker 3: that in a type either parameter or class for your
Speaker 3: for use. That's one. And we also have this sense
Speaker 3: of a task, so you can essentially have a workflow
Speaker 3: where you can define dependencies like before I build, I
Speaker 3: want to restore, and before I test I want to build.
Speaker 3: You can define that Shane in C sharp. And also
Speaker 3: the biggest advantage you can run it locally before it
Speaker 3: push it because usually this like the workplace, I edit
Speaker 3: my YAMO file, I committed and push it. Eventually something
Speaker 3: happens somewhere advice while I go get my coffee, and
Speaker 3: then I went in for the agent to start, and
Speaker 3: then it installs dot net or something, and then you
Speaker 3: get an error online twenty two something something because I
Speaker 3: couldn't find the file. And so in that way, cake
Speaker 3: will improve the feedback cycle because you can try it
Speaker 3: out locally first and get feedback quickly. You can also
Speaker 3: get all the intellicens and everything for everything, so you
Speaker 3: get a better develop a few cycle. So that's I
Speaker 3: think what the CAKE brings to the tail.
Speaker 2: Yeah, and you're sticking with one language, right, and you're
Speaker 2: not hopping I mean not that really consider a link
Speaker 2: yamal language. But it's still you know there is a
Speaker 2: syntax and an organization to it, mostly involving indents that
Speaker 2: that you have to deal with, like I think you're
Speaker 2: urgency sharp is nobody cares what you're indents or do
Speaker 2: what you want? You want you want braces on every
Speaker 2: on a separate line each time like a crazy person,
Speaker 2: knock yourself out, that's fine, lay it out however you want.
Speaker 3: And also things like upload artifacts, well that can be
Speaker 3: a you need to find a toss that is upload
Speaker 3: something something or and we have us like get of
Speaker 3: actions dot to come on dot upload artifacts, right, which
Speaker 3: is to coverbel and it will and we al those
Speaker 3: abstractions like we have we have typed if it's a
Speaker 3: file pof or if it's a directory pof, which means
Speaker 3: intent is clear just by looking at intelligence and method documentation, right.
Speaker 3: And also one thing that's usually you don't know what
Speaker 3: often by context inlock, what's the current directory or what
Speaker 3: are the things that that and that's you will just
Speaker 3: get by the VAUT because if you do, it doesn't pack.
Speaker 3: You'll lower it ends there and you can test it
Speaker 3: locally and then it will work on c I too,
Speaker 3: because it will end up in the artifacs folder because
Speaker 3: you can test that locally and you can upload it.
Speaker 1: So you said orchestration, but you're really focused on build automation, right,
Speaker 1: I mean there's no do you touch containers at all
Speaker 1: or any of that.
Speaker 3: That's actually what anything I can do almost the YAMA
Speaker 3: we can do and that. So you can build containers,
Speaker 3: and you can even now with ten and you can
Speaker 3: even now build your with SDK, you can actually build
Speaker 3: your script into a container, so you can have that
Speaker 3: pre build the running so which means you can really
Speaker 3: you can have something that's yester and pre compiled and
Speaker 3: have really good stockup times.
Speaker 1: But it's not a run time orchestrator like you know
Speaker 1: you would have with Kubernetes or something like that. You
Speaker 1: really focused on building, right.
Speaker 3: Yeah, it's agnostic. It's it's more orchestrating the tasks you.
Speaker 4: Need to do to be able to to be able
Speaker 4: to like if you want to push the registry, you
Speaker 4: pull down from a registry, build art facts, or package
Speaker 4: up your output for a published or.
Speaker 1: So now we know what cake is. You have some
Speaker 1: stks that you want to talk about.
Speaker 3: Yeah, that's like the new SDK, and that's essentially what
Speaker 3: we've done, is like how can we take all like
Speaker 3: the simplicity and before Like, well, if you're going to
Speaker 3: see the current state of CAKE is we have a
Speaker 3: dot Nea tool which is essentially interprets a CAKE file,
Speaker 3: which is uses the Grostling compiler to compile. And now
Speaker 3: with SDK, we will ask you just to be top
Speaker 3: level console application and just reference that, which means that
Speaker 3: the whole things with bootstrapping is almost the only thing
Speaker 3: you need to have installed now to use CAKE is
Speaker 3: the dott ESK, which has simplified. It's almost like a journey.
Speaker 3: But with the first Cake we were DONA framework and
Speaker 3: then you had to have a new get packaged that
Speaker 3: someone needed some PowerShell bootstrapper to pull down. And then
Speaker 3: with doctor q twe the Doctor tool system game and
Speaker 3: then we could do installed tools and that was almost
Speaker 3: like the next iteration with this file application and like
Speaker 3: one thing you need is so that's ky and you
Speaker 3: can go on with simply and we are with s K.
Speaker 3: Also is that we everything that we know a love
Speaker 3: from CAKE, like we have all this like we have
Speaker 3: modules which can replace internal it's in Cake you can
Speaker 3: things like logging and five system access and things that
Speaker 3: that's pull just work also with SDK, so you can
Speaker 3: also add a NuGet package reference and I will you
Speaker 3: will automatically code generate that for you. We have things
Speaker 3: like the College ass was our helpper commands for things.
Speaker 3: We have loads that the IM built in for things
Speaker 3: like that that build do NuGet restore and things. But
Speaker 3: there are several things like some messages to teams or
Speaker 3: Slack or Twitter or things that the community provided and
Speaker 3: those of us add the package reference and the skillsomatically
Speaker 3: generate the proxim methods needed for those are just they're
Speaker 3: just available for you to use in the euroscript or
Speaker 3: in your console application. It's not so that that's essentially
Speaker 3: what sk have done. All the magic bits that script
Speaker 3: undergund we do just as a regular or not that
Speaker 3: product now. So it simplifies a lot of things for us,
Speaker 3: and it's just we don't need to think about all
Speaker 3: the special things. It's just the DOTT console application essentially
Speaker 3: for their use now and.
Speaker 2: It's just make it immediately thinking about the security context
Speaker 2: on this that now you can run with lower security
Speaker 2: context in the script rather than when you're running this
Speaker 2: directly from the developers perspective and in the developer's security context,
Speaker 2: so it probably is a bit safer, especially if we
Speaker 2: have multiple contributors where not everybody has to have make
Speaker 2: rights at all. They could they could be able to
Speaker 2: run separately.
Speaker 3: And that's the cool thing about having container support now
Speaker 3: is that essentially you can do something in container. You
Speaker 3: can assentially mount the current repository and build in an
Speaker 3: isolated environment, which is really cool if you want to
Speaker 3: test stuff without affecting the developers environments. So I don't
Speaker 3: think you can help pre made developer containers that builds
Speaker 3: everything without their needing to know what dependencies that need
Speaker 3: to be installed and things, so that's also good.
Speaker 2: Yeah. Interesting, it's literally like I want to set build it.
Speaker 2: I set and make that is essentially set up this
Speaker 2: environment for me so I can do these tests and
Speaker 2: tear it back down again. Like that gets really powerful.
Speaker 2: That's cool, man. I like it a lot, and it
Speaker 2: should be thinking more broadly about how people want to
Speaker 2: build software now.
Speaker 3: And then I think there also little like that you
Speaker 3: reuse the tools that you use daily, so it's very
Speaker 3: little context switching, and you can use like vs code
Speaker 3: for what was supported up now with a tenement that
Speaker 3: we've supported for these product last files. Yeah, but also
Speaker 3: they have a path to you can do dot net
Speaker 3: project to convert. So actually before you have been stuck
Speaker 3: like if something becomes too advanced that you want the
Speaker 3: foolish to the idea. Before we the cake script, it
Speaker 3: was like something special. Now we can actually just convert
Speaker 3: it to a sea shore project and you can use
Speaker 3: foolish as due if you if you want, right, So
Speaker 3: that's also advantages that we don't do fewer things and
Speaker 3: had off more to your martuals to support, and we
Speaker 3: can focus on our core problems to do bilo automation
Speaker 3: and that'd be important.
Speaker 2: Yeah, well you said build automations for a lot of
Speaker 2: different things. You want to set up a configuration for
Speaker 2: a test lab, you want to go to a pre
Speaker 2: prod for some load testing or you know other tests.
Speaker 2: Like there's a lot of if I feel like with
Speaker 2: the SDK approach, it's really shipping it down so I
Speaker 2: can write a set of scripts they will run in
Speaker 2: all those places, not have to make separate ones for
Speaker 2: each other. A lot of cut and pasting.
Speaker 3: Yeah, and that's what I mean to cross the environment
Speaker 3: because you can have the same build script and then
Speaker 3: based on the environment, and that's where where we try it.
Speaker 3: Also K provides abstractions. We have things like I am
Speaker 3: running on Linux, I'm I running a mac am I
Speaker 3: running on get up. We have or not running on
Speaker 3: things like git Clubs or Ash develops. We have ready
Speaker 3: made just pooly on property so you can check which
Speaker 3: is make it really easy, don't need to find out
Speaker 3: which esoteric environments.
Speaker 5: Variable don't know to know or notice or we have
Speaker 5: that already wrapped. So we have support for I don't know,
Speaker 5: twelve or thirteen build systems. We add the adams and
Speaker 5: go along, which means that you can have the same flow.
Speaker 5: So if you want portability to well like now we're
Speaker 5: working Asher DeVos, but we want to move to get
Speaker 5: up actions, there's very little you need. You can start
Speaker 5: that process now and essentially just change which boolean you're
Speaker 5: looking at. And also the cake tasks have support for
Speaker 5: things like conditionals. You can say that this task we
Speaker 5: give actions, so we do upload artifacts and GILA actions
Speaker 5: and this if you're on Lasher Develops, we do upload
Speaker 5: artifact using that privider and but the rest of the
Speaker 5: bill flow is the same.
Speaker 1: And you support Android in iOS too right.
Speaker 3: Well as a target, but that's essentially then you're using
Speaker 3: something like like MAUI or you're saying that or anything
Speaker 3: you can like if you can execute like scriptwise. So
Speaker 3: the host will be either macros or Linux or Windows
Speaker 3: or FreeBSD or something like that. But what you can tower,
Speaker 3: anything you can build with a dot net scale or
Speaker 3: any other scale for that. It's very cool the part
Speaker 3: you can automate, and that's where the community steps in.
Speaker 3: What the audience, because there are several hundred addings add
Speaker 3: over years to add things that I don't know about,
Speaker 3: things like the Android Estcade manager or something something that
Speaker 3: I don't use dailid that's some extension, or things like
Speaker 3: us AT communicating with slack bard teams or that we
Speaker 3: don't want in the box, but you can have it
Speaker 3: if you want.
Speaker 1: So firm listening to what you just said, it's the
Speaker 1: the big takeaway here, friends, is that rather than using
Speaker 1: the Cake command line app to do everything, now you
Speaker 1: can write your own c sharp apps and call the
Speaker 1: SDK to do whatever you want to do with the
Speaker 1: Cake in your own app.
Speaker 3: So yeah, so it's actually the sk just brings it in.
Speaker 3: So you have it available everywhere in a regular console application,
Speaker 3: so you will have things like dotnut build, or it
Speaker 3: just appears by adding a reference to scale.
Speaker 1: Ye love it.
Speaker 2: Why don't we take break? And then I want to
Speaker 2: change cares a little bit here and dig into some
Speaker 2: of these integration.
Speaker 1: Sounds good. We'll be right back after these very important messages.
Speaker 1: Did you know there's a dot net on aws community.
Speaker 1: Follow the social media blogs, YouTube influencers and open source
Speaker 1: projects and add your own voice. Get plugged into the
Speaker 1: dot net on aws community at aws dot Amazon dot com,
Speaker 1: slash dot net.
Speaker 2: And we're back. It's dot net rocks. I'm Richard Campbell,
Speaker 2: that's Carl Franklin. You know, you're hanging with our buddy Mattias,
Speaker 2: who's been poured years of work into kuh and now
Speaker 2: with the SDK approach. So if you just want to
Speaker 2: build into your own app, you can do that. And
Speaker 2: I've just been thumbing through the huge number of integrations here.
Speaker 2: I mean the obvious ones like visual Studio and get
Speaker 2: have actions and so forth, but boy, there's stuff I've
Speaker 2: never used. You know. Heck, there's still Team city support.
Speaker 2: Who's got Team City anymore? That's awesome team City.
Speaker 3: Yeah, I've had a lot of developers like that, especially
Speaker 3: those of that loose hosted solutions, and also what we
Speaker 3: see there's also a trend of sometimes like stepping back
Speaker 3: from services, especially in Europe, like how can we do
Speaker 3: more on premise if needed? So that's where often those
Speaker 3: systems come in when you're running and none you're hosting yourself.
Speaker 2: Even support Jenkins yeah classic, oh yeah, and some of
Speaker 2: these are directly indicating some of them looked like the
Speaker 2: third their third party contributors that they actually did this
Speaker 2: and put it up on GitHub. So we had this
Speaker 2: conversation about new get contributions and so forth, like how
Speaker 2: much support do you get for this project but you've
Speaker 2: worked on in a long time.
Speaker 3: Well had some like Octopus Boiled Team have supported us
Speaker 3: some big computers, but like a few small but not
Speaker 3: any biggest. But it's been more of a marathon for us.
Speaker 3: Like for us, the motivation hasn't been financial. It's been
Speaker 3: sure most need to scratch our own inch and solve
Speaker 3: our own problems.
Speaker 2: Yeah, you've got to build software and you need good
Speaker 2: tools to make it easy to do so.
Speaker 3: Yeah, so all of us on the team are dot
Speaker 3: net developers and especially with me, a few of us
Speaker 3: are consultants or you work at product companies where this
Speaker 3: is something that we need to use. And that's why
Speaker 3: it's good to have we have a whole country organization
Speaker 3: and get up with things that all these addings exist
Speaker 3: and we can help provide that are in the box
Speaker 3: so you can find and the if you go like
Speaker 3: the cake has a tag on you gets you can
Speaker 3: easily find all those two. But it's hard with Sometimes
Speaker 3: with money comes expectations also, so it's usually what I've
Speaker 3: done something for money has been me as a consultant
Speaker 3: to code for someone, which makes it really easy. Gets clear,
Speaker 3: it has a boundary as a start and a stop date.
Speaker 2: That's not how open source projects work in this no no.
Speaker 3: But I mean if you're sometimes hard to explain, like
Speaker 3: there's some have high demands sometimes so they're very demanding
Speaker 3: and their get up issues and and like sorry today
Speaker 3: I want to walk the dog and be my kids instead,
Speaker 3: So you're not a priority.
Speaker 2: But I do my actual job so that I can
Speaker 2: pay my mortgage.
Speaker 3: Weird, but like if you're paying for my work, then
Speaker 3: you will get priority. It's not it's like some of
Speaker 3: the things that that's the worst thing I can say,
Speaker 3: like you want to be paid to solve this or
Speaker 3: but it's it's like if you want me to pay
Speaker 3: artis you over my customers and my kids and my
Speaker 3: wife and I want something back. But also sometimes can
Speaker 3: be I know a couple of years ago there was
Speaker 3: like the student from brazila pin me and DM and
Speaker 3: he was so nice about it. So we just spend
Speaker 3: like a night doing pair programming. So but that was
Speaker 3: like because I wanted to, And its like one of
Speaker 3: the driving factors, like like cakes have been for so
Speaker 3: many years, more like in Marathon, it's like not big
Speaker 3: bang things, but we had done a little each so
Speaker 3: we've been stable around. And there's a lot of open
Speaker 3: source product that they do a spike and then disappear,
Speaker 3: but it's.
Speaker 2: Also the thing they needed for their project and then
Speaker 2: they're gone.
Speaker 3: But it's almost harder to to do something where you
Speaker 3: can have be around like you have, like be around
Speaker 3: for a decade and still be active. That's harder long
Speaker 3: term because you need to take care of things, you
Speaker 3: have to be you have to like live with decisions
Speaker 3: you made twenty fifteen or twenty seventeen or that it's
Speaker 3: It's like, so I have a couple of interns now
Speaker 3: and I have to explain the whole job because we
Speaker 3: have been through the whole like Dotcore, one product, Jason Thing,
Speaker 3: dot Court and the whole thing. Like you are like
Speaker 3: you don't know how good you have it. I'll tell
Speaker 3: my interns like you haven't seen the things I've seen.
Speaker 2: Are open source stare.
Speaker 3: But I mean, I think it's important that you do
Speaker 3: it for a recommendational thing because otherwise it will burn out.
Speaker 3: It's and the sad part I think is that enterprises
Speaker 3: should care about more about their software bilom.
Speaker 2: With it's your build system like this, but also a
Speaker 2: small piece of work.
Speaker 3: Yeah, but any dependency, I think you should care about
Speaker 3: more because if you look at your software the heroes,
Speaker 3: if you don't know who's behind one component, that's a risk.
Speaker 3: And if any if it was something any other things,
Speaker 3: you would ever treat that as a huge risk. But
Speaker 3: there's one guy that has this critical component and that's
Speaker 3: why we're kind of sad. Now when I see people, oh,
Speaker 3: then if this goes commercial, I will just rewrite it myself. Well,
Speaker 3: you should take care of the people before they go
Speaker 3: bro the commercial or something. Why did they care about
Speaker 3: them when you just took their work for them? And
Speaker 3: also security device, it's really important to have a good
Speaker 3: index of what are your dependensies, how are they being patched,
Speaker 3: are they actively maintained and things that that, And that's
Speaker 3: the whole thing with what I really applaud you get
Speaker 3: for adding this support button. But at the same time,
Speaker 3: the cyndic in is like will people find that support?
Speaker 3: I would like this? Then this is the first step.
Speaker 3: Hopefully the next step will be that if we'll be
Speaker 3: able to be report back into something like the dot
Speaker 3: cli or something that these are people you have packtes
Speaker 3: that you could support or even be part of things
Speaker 3: like the bill providers like I should have ups and
Speaker 3: get clubs and get hub Like could they want to
Speaker 3: do this data and say you have dependencies you should
Speaker 3: do some kind of funding to them.
Speaker 2: Yeah. Absolutely, And I've always looked at that from the
Speaker 2: GitHub perspective. It's from an area you're paying for an
Speaker 2: enterprise account. You hopefully have a bill of materials across
Speaker 2: all these different applications that all bill milt in your company,
Speaker 2: and you can look across the over source projects say
Speaker 2: all right, you know, from a CFOs project, I want
Speaker 2: to kind of check once a year and then have
Speaker 2: it allocated out of the project depend on and you
Speaker 2: know make would obviously fall into that category two. But
Speaker 2: you know, one step at a time, they're doing the
Speaker 2: contributions at the new get level. Fine, you know, whatever
Speaker 2: mechanism moves as closer to the goal of making it
Speaker 2: easy for companies to do the right thing, because right
Speaker 2: now it's pretty hard.
Speaker 3: And problem is that people that have to monet they
Speaker 3: aren't part of that quisition process. That's one problem. That's
Speaker 3: the one problem with open source. Like someone does not
Speaker 3: that package add and and they just add that package
Speaker 3: and there's no like, as a maintainer, I don't know
Speaker 3: that someone has consumed my package, and they're like they
Speaker 3: can neither the CEO or CTO or whatever it knows
Speaker 3: that they have actually done a purchase.
Speaker 1: I want to go back to something you said in
Speaker 1: passing that it can create an index list of dependencies, right.
Speaker 1: I mean, that's everybody is realizing that having a software
Speaker 1: build materials or an s bomb these days is critical,
Speaker 1: but not just for your projects but for everything in
Speaker 1: your infrastructure. And this is just a way to add
Speaker 1: to that without having to jump to a lot of hoops.
Speaker 1: It seems to me, I am I based about that.
Speaker 3: I would challenge that everyone thinks it's important. There they
Speaker 3: think it's important once you have sit down and have
Speaker 3: discussion with management, like as a consultant, I like, do
Speaker 3: you know the risk you're putting yourself into ear like
Speaker 3: and then there's is a no brainer. But it's I
Speaker 3: really hope just.
Speaker 1: As so we think it's important. But that doesn't mean
Speaker 1: your customers think no it should.
Speaker 3: It should be just the supporting important. As you have
Speaker 3: a fire alarm or detector in your house, you should
Speaker 3: be able to have because if there is something like
Speaker 3: heart beat or something else, then you will. I want
Speaker 3: to be able to identify which dependence is do I
Speaker 3: have in my product to like, because are like the
Speaker 3: first thing? Are you affected or not? Or what that's
Speaker 3: or otherwise just being people wou take rashed actions to
Speaker 3: might even not solve the problem.
Speaker 1: So yeah, not everybody listens to security this week and
Speaker 1: there you go, they should I do.
Speaker 2: But also you know, an individual developer and given organizations
Speaker 2: only think about the things they added, They don't have
Speaker 2: an overview of all of the libraries that are used
Speaker 2: throughout the organization, and the people who are most could
Speaker 2: be most concerned about this, which tends to be leadership,
Speaker 2: aren't aware of what's happening.
Speaker 3: So that's what and that's why we like we use
Speaker 3: tools to index dependencies and report them back to some
Speaker 3: central location.
Speaker 2: Right.
Speaker 3: We often use things like actual log analyst disks to
Speaker 3: report as a central post. Then we can quite crearis
Speaker 3: across things and use tools to essentially what are the
Speaker 3: both the direct dependencies but also people tried tend to
Speaker 3: forget the transit dependencies have dependencies, right, and that's a rabbitoil.
Speaker 2: You have to go down and yeah, you have to
Speaker 2: explore the whole tree there to actually get at some
Speaker 2: of like this is how this is how deep this
Speaker 2: thing goes because there's always that little library called from
Speaker 2: that other thing that depends on this other thing. That's
Speaker 2: the one that goes away and everything breaks.
Speaker 1: Yeah, and that's why for reference sea log for j Yeah.
Speaker 3: Yeah, And I mean and you had the thing with
Speaker 3: open scesses. Well had the same thing, Like were a
Speaker 3: couple of people that had little attention, They weren't well known.
Speaker 3: Until everyone knows that the whole internet broke because of them, Yeah,
Speaker 3: and that was very unthankful for things. And that's why
Speaker 3: I think like CI tools and automation can really be
Speaker 3: really good because then you can you won't forget to
Speaker 3: inventory stuff. You will test and build the same way
Speaker 3: because you want your bills to be reproducible and you
Speaker 3: want them to be as like things will change, the
Speaker 3: environment will change, you will have new dependence and things that,
Speaker 3: but you want them to be done in a similar
Speaker 3: way for all projects. And that's something I like. If
Speaker 3: you have something like a program language, then you can
Speaker 3: start thinking more like what's the recipe for our bills
Speaker 3: in our systems? It can be more like an engineer
Speaker 3: for these things too, treat them as just like they
Speaker 3: should be just as high quality as you being with
Speaker 3: your regular code or video test or everything. And that's
Speaker 3: why we have done huge steps with things like JAM
Speaker 3: because before we had a point to clicking UIs and
Speaker 3: we had things that mut tasted over time and no
Speaker 3: one knows how how we got.
Speaker 2: There, and a word documented was always wrong right well.
Speaker 3: And that's the thing with reputation because it's usually it's
Speaker 3: either it's where we want to be or where we
Speaker 3: were but fairly where we are.
Speaker 2: So that's it's what happened last time, but often.
Speaker 3: Not saber reputation is where they wanted it to be.
Speaker 3: That was like the intentions for like the sister should
Speaker 3: have looks like this, and other things happened.
Speaker 1: I think that's going to be a common use of
Speaker 1: large language models is to parse logs and tell me
Speaker 1: what I need to today, you know.
Speaker 3: Yeah, And that's something's really cool, like being like take's
Speaker 3: being around for an eleven years. Is that I'm like,
Speaker 3: I sat down with curser one day and it could
Speaker 3: write cake scrips for me because there's so much nice
Speaker 3: out there. So actually I was impressed, Like how right
Speaker 3: it got it.
Speaker 1: That's good and good to know.
Speaker 3: And that's the thing about that. But well, if you
Speaker 3: have like a proper language with a language server and
Speaker 3: it has defined rules, that's perfect for all of them.
Speaker 3: So it can good for those scenarios too, Like you
Speaker 3: can actually be very productive if you have like constraints
Speaker 3: makes you more productive in elms and artis.
Speaker 1: I think that this software I think software development is
Speaker 1: one of those few maybe few, but certainly safe place
Speaker 1: for l l ms because we run our stuff through
Speaker 1: a compiler before we run it. You know, we we
Speaker 1: got fact checking. It's called the compiler.
Speaker 3: And if you have things like like I use a
Speaker 3: lot of we talked about testing in the starting of
Speaker 3: the program. You'll recommend like the listener there and I
Speaker 3: use a lot of snapshot testing as I should verify
Speaker 3: from simon cropt. Yes, so great, very because then it
Speaker 3: won't forget an assert, so you will always snapshot objects,
Speaker 3: which means that if things change, your test will fail.
Speaker 3: And you can also go for more like instead of
Speaker 3: doing those really small unit tests, you can go from
Speaker 3: the outside in. And that's also really good because when
Speaker 3: an LM does something, they will get things totally wrong.
Speaker 3: But then you test at least hopefully will fail and
Speaker 3: if they don't fail, then you will have to fix
Speaker 3: your test also so they the next time you will
Speaker 3: catch it. So you're like, you will need to be
Speaker 3: an engineer and you need to you need to evolve.
Speaker 2: Yeah, for sure, And that makes a lot of sense.
Speaker 2: And it is interesting you see that these tools will
Speaker 2: be a way to get into the make flow if
Speaker 2: you want to, just because it's maturity means it's had
Speaker 2: great sample data to test.
Speaker 1: Are you going to have an MCP for for Cake
Speaker 1: or do you already I don't know if you if
Speaker 1: you need it, but we are like right because you
Speaker 1: have the s K. It's pretty self expand.
Speaker 3: But also like for some things it might think with
Speaker 3: us to work because we are using for a command
Speaker 3: line parsing, we're using the spectraor Console CLI product and
Speaker 3: it has now something called and the open sealizes back
Speaker 3: built in and some if you have suspect from something
Speaker 3: like Commander arguments. There's actually a person that did a
Speaker 3: proof of concept MCP just now. Because if you get
Speaker 3: something that's parsonable machine, you have an MCP essentially, so
Speaker 3: all having if you have something that strongly typed, it
Speaker 3: will become easier. And and but I think and also
Speaker 3: if you can get more and more users, they can
Speaker 3: the advantage of something that live for many years that
Speaker 3: they can look at a lot of things. But I
Speaker 3: like this for things like the Agent m D they
Speaker 3: can put in the postories. We can have the instructions
Speaker 3: as you can confined. I think something like we be
Speaker 3: learning become better because the instructions to to create boundaries
Speaker 3: for your LMS to make the more better context.
Speaker 1: Yeah, this is great stuff, what's coming up next in
Speaker 1: your inbox?
Speaker 3: I will be speaking at next week and dot dot
Speaker 3: com will be talking open my cake and like next
Speaker 3: by this airs it will all be done. So we
Speaker 3: are coming from from the black future, but we are
Speaker 3: like we were easing cakes versus six point zero. So
Speaker 3: the cake tool will still be supported along time the
Speaker 3: st K and we will launch that just after the town.
Speaker 2: Right be thinking this has got to be SYNCD with
Speaker 2: dot net ten is obviously their changes the foot.
Speaker 3: And that's been our mantra. We have always released the
Speaker 3: last years when the major version of the next comes out,
Speaker 3: and we'll almost have the same day or just after
Speaker 3: support for for kate with the dot version, so we
Speaker 3: will so we will launch at TWN and so that
Speaker 3: would be and will take a breeder hopefully it takes
Speaker 3: on Christmas and things. And for us there's been loads
Speaker 3: of fun because what I like when there's like big
Speaker 3: shifts and st K is it actually see it's as
Speaker 3: a big code cutta and some fun. And this was
Speaker 3: fun because this like was one of the main just
Speaker 3: like when they have DOTTA tools or when when we
Speaker 3: had like the Rustling compiler and things that that's things
Speaker 3: that we can see like opportunities for some fe and
Speaker 3: this has been the whole The new Tennis K has loads.
Speaker 1: Of loads of stuff.
Speaker 3: There's so much there's so much talk about AI and things,
Speaker 3: but actually added a lot of developer good things that
Speaker 3: almost fall in the shadow of AI over there. Things
Speaker 3: you almost forget a fatigue, but there's a lot of
Speaker 3: good things in performance wise, there's new commands, so people
Speaker 3: should really play with dot ten and look at those
Speaker 3: areas too.
Speaker 2: It's it's not just yeah, and I'm I'm really looking
Speaker 2: forward to Studio twenty twenty six and just see what
Speaker 2: this rethink about. Yea, these new tools come into play
Speaker 2: and you know, more and more, I'm calling them just
Speaker 2: smart code generators, you know, because that's what they're doing
Speaker 2: for us. And if you use them well, they could
Speaker 2: spin up a pretty good code and if you don't,
Speaker 2: they'll make a mess.
Speaker 3: We've always been going to generate the code, and what
Speaker 3: I want to say is that I'm being good at
Speaker 3: maintaining code, because that's the next step. They're currently really
Speaker 3: good at spitting out code.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I think we got to get to a place
Speaker 2: where the model is trained against the codebase. That's there,
Speaker 2: and so it naturally constrains itself to the work that's
Speaker 2: come before and and you know, sort of keeps it
Speaker 2: in line. I think there's actually possibilities there and.
Speaker 3: It will be interesting with things like that. Would have
Speaker 3: liked the new like the framework that has new amdc
Speaker 3: ap use. But you have really good AI on the
Speaker 3: ship for developers. Yeah, like what can we do with
Speaker 3: local elms in concert with co pilot them. Yeah, that
Speaker 3: would be cool to see.
Speaker 2: A Yeah, trying to get my hands on one of
Speaker 2: those d d GX sparks and see if I can
Speaker 2: run the whole thing from there.
Speaker 1: Yeah, you and me both. If you find a source,
Speaker 1: let me know.
Speaker 2: It's going to be a mere three thousand dollars.
Speaker 3: Yeah.
Speaker 1: Tis you mentioned ordev the conference in Malmo, and Richard
Speaker 1: and I did that for several years. Boy, I really
Speaker 1: missed that place. I really missed that conference.
Speaker 3: Should go up next here.
Speaker 2: We'll try and figure it out. We will try to
Speaker 2: figure that.
Speaker 1: But we had.
Speaker 3: It's a great conference and it's good. It's like it's
Speaker 3: perfectly like Malm less by Copenhagen, and it's nice.
Speaker 2: To fly in to Copenhagen and take train up.
Speaker 1: We interviewed some of our idols there. It was really great, yeah.
Speaker 2: Back in the day.
Speaker 1: All right, Well, is there anything else you want to
Speaker 1: throw out there before we say goodbye? Tis?
Speaker 3: I don't know, like hopefully, like just play with the
Speaker 3: stuff if you want, and just ping thing else and
Speaker 3: give us feedbackcause we will take it where we think
Speaker 3: it's probably be. We won't. We still support all things,
Speaker 3: but I think this is probably way forward interesting and
Speaker 3: if we get that feedback from the community, will if
Speaker 3: people use it, they'll like it.
Speaker 1: Yeah, And hey, listeners, push the donate button. You know
Speaker 1: what I'm saying there, You go give him some monetary love.
Speaker 1: All right, Matias, thanks a lot. It sounds great and
Speaker 1: we'll talk to you, dear listener next time on dot
Speaker 1: net rocks.
Speaker 6: Dot net Rocks is brought to you by Franklin's Net
Speaker 6: and produced by Pop Studios, a full service audio, video
Speaker 6: and post production facilities located physically in New London, Connecticut,
Speaker 6: and of course in the cloud online at pwop dot com.
Speaker 6: Visit our website at d O T N E, t
Speaker 6: R O c k S dot com for RSS feeds, downloads,
Speaker 6: mobile apps, comments, and access to the full archives. Going
Speaker 6: back to show number one, recorded in September two thousand
Speaker 6: and two, and make sure you check out our sponsors.
Speaker 1: They keep us in business.
Speaker 6: Now go write some code, see you next time you
Speaker 6: got jud Middle Vans.
Speaker 3: Then on Texas