今日已更新 308 条资讯 | 累计 31986 条内容
关于我们

标签：#t

找到 15271 篇相关文章

AI 资讯

A homemade CI/CD pipeline with GitHub Actions

In the previous article on hosting a Next.js app on a VPS , I'd left the deployment pipeline as a rough sketch: four lines to say "it ships to production on its own when you push." That's the piece I want to open up here, because it's what separates a VPS you fuss over by hand from infrastructure you can forget about. There's a stubborn myth that CI/CD is a big-company thing, with a dedicated DevOps team and six-figure tooling. Not true. The pipeline that deploys this portfolio fits in two YAML files, you can read it in five minutes, and it gives me back exactly the comfort I liked about Vercel: I push to master , I go grab a coffee, the app is live when I'm back. The one thing I gained along the way is knowing precisely what happens between the git push and the running container. Four steps, in this order Deployment is a chain. On every push to master , GitHub Actions runs lint, security scan, image build, and deploy. What matters is the needs : as long as a step fails, the following ones don't start. A critical vulnerability caught by the scan, and the image never gets built. At all. jobs : lint : # ESLint runs-on : ubuntu-latest # ... security : # Trivy scan (reusable workflow) uses : ./.github/workflows/security.yml build-push : # build the Docker image → push to GHCR needs : [ lint , security ] # ... deploy : # SSH to the VPS → docker compose pull && up -d needs : [ build-push ] # ... Lint first, because it's the cheapest step and there's no point building an image if ESLint is already screaming. The scan next, as a barrier. Then the build, which produces the Docker image and pushes it to GHCR, GitHub's container registry (private, in my case). And finally the deploy, which connects over SSH to the VPS, pulls the new image and restarts the container. Four links, each blocking the next. That's the whole secret. The security scan is in the path, not in a review "for later" This is the one I won't budge on. Dependency security, in a lot of projects, is a Dependabo

2026-06-28 原文 →
AI 资讯

How I Built GitPulse: A Cinematic Developer Storyteller (and why standard GitHub profiles are boring)

Let's be honest — standard GitHub profiles are a bit... static. As a Full Stack Developer & AI/ML Specialist, I wanted a way to showcase my contributions that actually felt alive. I didn't just want a grid of green squares; I wanted a universe. So, I built GitPulse. What is GitPulse? GitPulse is a cinematic, interactive web application that transforms standard GitHub profiles and repository logs into glowing, animated contribution universes. Instead of just seeing numbers, you experience your code history visually. The Tech Stack I wanted this to feel premium, fast, and visually stunning without relying on heavy frontend frameworks if I didn't need to. Canvas API & GSAP: For buttery-smooth micro-animations and physics. Glassmorphism UI: Using CSS backdrop-filters to create a modern, deep aesthetic. Vanilla JavaScript: Keeping the core logic incredibly fast and lightweight. The "Stellar Duel" Feature One of the coolest features I added was the Stellar Duel mode. I thought: What if you could compare your GitHub activity with a friend, but instead of a boring chart, it looked like a sci-fi dashboard? Stellar Duel Using the GitHub API, GitPulse fetches the data and renders a live, side-by-side visual duel of your commit history, stars, and PRs. It’s highly interactive and honestly, just really fun to look at. The Biggest Challenge: Performance Rendering thousands of data points (commits) visually on a canvas can crash a browser if you aren't careful. To solve this, I had to heavily optimize the animation loop. Instead of manipulating the DOM for every star/commit node, I used HTML5 Canvas to batch render the visual elements. I also implemented requestAnimationFrame properly to ensure the animations pause when the user switches tabs, saving CPU cycles. See it in Action I've integrated GitPulse directly into my main portfolio. You can try it live here: GitPulse Live Demo And if you want to see more of the projects I build (especially in the AI/ML and Computer Vision space

2026-06-28 原文 →
开发者

I built a free UAE calculator platform that runs on live government data

Living in the UAE means constantly Googling numbers: what is the visa fee now, how much zakat do I owe, what is today's fuel price, how is my gratuity calculated. The answers online are usually outdated. So I built Adad , a free set of 15 calculators that pull from official UAE government sources and refresh every 24 hours. No sign-up, works in 8 languages. A few that people use most: Visa fees: real GDRFA and ICA rates Zakat: gold, silver, savings DEWA bills: estimate before the bill lands Gratuity: UAE labour-law end-of-service It is at adad.ae if it is useful to you. Happy to answer how the data pipeline stays current.

2026-06-28 原文 →
AI 资讯

Quitter Vercel : héberger son app Next.js sur un VPS

Vercel m'a longtemps convenu. Tu pousses ton code, trente secondes plus tard c'est en ligne avec un certificat valide, un CDN et des previews par branche. Pour démarrer un projet, je ne connais rien de plus confortable. Le problème arrive après, quand le projet vit. La facture grimpe avec le trafic et les fonctions serverless, certaines fonctionnalités propriétaires deviennent compliquées à reproduire ailleurs, et tu finis par ne plus vraiment savoir où ni comment ton app tourne. C'est un excellent point de départ, et un piège dès qu'on veut maîtriser son coût et son infra. Pour ce portfolio comme pour plusieurs projets clients, j'ai pris le chemin inverse. Un VPS à quelques euros par mois, une image Docker, un reverse proxy, un pipeline maison. L'idée n'est pas de revenir à l'âge de pierre du déploiement par FTP : je garde le « git push et c'est en ligne », mais sur une machine que je contrôle de bout en bout. Voici comment c'est câblé, et les deux ou trois endroits où je me suis fait avoir. L'image Docker : tout repose sur le mode standalone La pièce qui change tout, c'est output: "standalone" dans next.config.ts . Au build, Next trace exactement les fichiers nécessaires au runtime et les recopie dans .next/standalone/ . On passe d'une image d'environ 1 Go à environ 200 Mo. Sans ça, tu traînes tout node_modules dans ton conteneur de prod pour rien. Le Dockerfile est multi-stage : une étape pour installer les dépendances, une pour builder, une dernière qui ne garde que le strict nécessaire. # deps : installe les dépendances (cache Docker optimal) FROM node:22-alpine AS deps WORKDIR /app COPY package.json yarn.lock .yarnrc.yml ./ RUN corepack enable && yarn install --immutable # builder : build l'app FROM node:22-alpine AS builder WORKDIR /app COPY --from=deps /app/node_modules ./node_modules COPY . . RUN corepack enable && yarn build # runner : image finale, non-root FROM node:22-alpine AS runner WORKDIR /app ENV NODE_ENV=production RUN addgroup -g 1001 nodejs && a

2026-06-28 原文 →
AI 资讯

OKF for Claude Code: structured, portable memory your agent (and team) can read

The problem: agents forget your project every session If you pair with a coding agent, you have lived this: a new session starts and the context is gone. The agent re-discovers your auth flow, re-guesses why a decision was made, re-reads the same files to rebuild a mental model you already explained yesterday. Project knowledge — the why behind your systems, the runbooks, the "don't touch this, here's the reason" — lives scattered across wikis, code comments, and people's heads. None of it travels with the code, and none of it survives a fresh context window. CLAUDE.md helps, but it's for standing instructions , and it gets loaded wholesale into every prompt. Auto-memory captures what an agent picked up, but it's implicit, per-agent, and not reviewed. A wiki is for humans and needs exporting. There's a gap: curated team knowledge that's structured, versioned with the code, and readable by any agent or person. What OKF is Open Knowledge Format is an open, vendor-neutral format (announced by the Google Cloud Data Cloud team in June 2026, Apache-2.0) that represents knowledge as a directory of markdown files with YAML frontmatter . That's the whole idea. No schema registry, no runtime, no SDK. If you can cat a file you can read it; if you can git clone a repo you can ship it. A bundle looks like this: .okf/ ├── index.md # progressive disclosure (root carries okf_version) ├── log.md # ISO-dated change history, newest first ├── services/auth-api.md # one concept = one file; path is its ID ├── datasets/orders-db.md ├── decisions/use-okf.md ├── runbooks/payment-failures.md └── metrics/checkout-conversion.md Each concept needs exactly one thing to be conformant: YAML frontmatter with a non-empty type . Everything else is optional. --- type : Service title : " Auth API" description : " Issues and verifies short-lived access tokens." resource : https://github.com/acme/auth tags : [ auth , platform ] timestamp : 2026-06-14T10:00:00Z --- # Endpoints | Method | Path | Descriptio

2026-06-28 原文 →
AI 资讯

Stop Asking the LLM Whether Its Source Is Real

You ask the AI for a bibliography. It hands you a title, authors, a journal, a year, a well-formed DOI. Everything is plausible, everything is clean. And one reference in two doesn't exist. Not "approximate": nonexistent. The DOI resolves to nothing, the paper was never written. The reflex is to ask the model again: "are you sure this source is real?" It says yes. Always. You just asked the forger about the authenticity of his forgery. Hallucination is plausible by construction An LLM doesn't store a database of publications. It generates likely sequences of words. A citation, to it, is a shape: a surname, an initial, two more names, a capitalized journal, a recent year, ten DOI digits. It produces that shape perfectly, because that's exactly what it's good at. The content doesn't need to be true to be plausible, it just needs to resemble. That's why a hallucinated reference is so vicious: it doesn't look like an error. A wrong calculation jumps out. An invented citation looks like a real one, until you click. Don't ask the culprit The golden rule fits in one sentence: never ask the model that hallucinated a citation whether that citation is real. For two reasons that compound. First, it doesn't have the information: it has no access to a registry, it can only regenerate something plausible. Second, even if it doubted, its self-evaluation bias pushes it to confirm what it already produced. You get a "yes" worth nothing. Verification has to come from elsewhere. From a source the model neither controls nor can invent: a metadata API. Three filters: existence, credibility, fidelity In my pipeline for writing technical dossiers, no reference enters the document before clearing three filters, in this order. Existence. The DOI must resolve. It's binary, and it's free. Crossref exposes its whole database: curl -s "https://api.crossref.org/works/10.1145/3290605.3300233" \ | jq '.message.title[0], .message.author[0].family, .message["published"]' If the API returns a title a

2026-06-28 原文 →
← 上一页 下一页 →