balp

Oil and gas products account for 4.2% of Sweden’s exports. The gas exports alone almost rival those of dairy and eggs! Truly a petrostate if I ever saw one

Well the largest category is

• Machinery, Nuclear reactors and boilers. The nuclear part of this in Sweden is quite small so machinery is the big part. 14%. Second is:
• Vechicles, Other than railway, trans. E.g. the later large Car and Lorrie, Truck manufacturers, Volvo, Volvo Cars and Scania. also about 14% The third is:
• Electrical, electronic equipment, with large companies like Ericsson. 8.7% Then on fort place:
• Mineral Fuels, Oils, distillation products, 7.4% Thou there are no internal sources for this is mostly refining of imported gods.

https://tradingeconomics.com/sweden/exports-by-category

I would say yes and no, but yes the clone command can do it. But branching and CI get a bit more complicated. Pushing and reviewing changes gets more complicated to get the overview. If the functionality and especially the release cycle is different the submodules still have great values. As always your product and repo structure is a mix of different considerations and always a compromise. I think the additions in git the last years have made the previous really bad pain points with bigger repos less annoying. So that I now see more situations it works well.

I always recommend keeping all testing in the same repo as the code that affects the tests. It keeps tracking changes in functionality easier, needing to coordinate commits, merging, and branches in more than one repo is a bigger cognitive load.

Yet, that is the real Linux phone killer move by the former, Microsoft CEO for Nokia. Also the move that killed Nokia phones.

It's also easier to work if one simple git command can get everything you need. There is a good case for a bigger nono-repo. It should be easy to debug tests on all levels else it's hard to fix issues that the bigger tests find. Many new changes in git make the downsides of a bigger repo less hurtful and the gains now start to outweigh the losses of a bigger repo.

I agree that in most cases it's more of an E2E or integratiuon test, not sure of the need to split into different repo, and well in the end I'm not sure that would have made any big protection anyhow.

The Windows Lumina phone was a battery-draining buggy version with a smaller screen than the Linux version N9, When they turned that into Windows (Lumina 800), they had to use a smaller screen and less memory as Windows couldn't handle the hardware as MeeGo could.

I'm not sure if Yggdrasil or Slackware, which we tried out at the old university computers. But quickly Debian became so much more flexible.

Or in the office, the hardware-software relations between the laptop and Windows and in some parts Linux are strained at best, where drivers, power management, and so on get crappy. E.g. after a year or two of updates, it gets out of control and nice things like hibernations don't work. It's usually a driver for some small thing you don't care about that forgot to read the Windows specification change and now it can't do that power handling in a good way. Oops the computer refuses to sleep and your bag is burning, your battery is 1% when picking the computer up again.

I'm not sure, many developers use mac to get working unix tools and working "enterprise" tools at work like Teams and other crap that the company uses for "everyone". Sadly many of these tools work like crap on Linux and maybe in best case the web-version is workable.

LiveNation has fixed the issue that artists got paid for playing live, not the companies can take that cut as well.

Imho on any server today all editors should be removed. You edit on your workstation and provision to the server.

I'll say losing its protection is an over-simplification. Yes, when a significant military target is misusing the protected signs they can be ignored. You still however are not allowed to break the first rules around minimising any civilian losses. So the civilian people in the area are still protected, they don't lose their protection. Injuries to civilians should always be kept minimal. If the hospital is cleared out and is only used for military operations (treating wonder soldiers is not a military operation here) then the symbols of the hospital don't have any protection. No, if you attach from within anything that is protected, you should expect to be attacked. At the same time, any attack on the enemy has to be proportional and should always strive to minimize civilian losses. Including civilian material losses. An example is a sniper hiding in a civilian building. It's probably a war crime to bomb the house. Even when there are no civilians in the house. If there is a full platoon using the same place for defense, and the terrain is hard, it is probably ok for the same bombing. If the building also has a few hundred civilians, well it is back in the probable war crimes to bomb it out and some other ways of taking the objective have to be considered. This even looks at the house without any special protection. Same with an ambulance, if there are enemy combatants in the ambulance attacking you, of course, you can take it out. If there are enemy combatants in the ambulance that are not attacking you, you can take them prisoner. But you can't shoot first to make sure there are no combatants in it. For me, if there has been a bombing of a hospital building with masses of patients inside, it's a clear war crime. Even if there were a few military in the same building.