git mv locale/ po/

1 files changed, 0 insertions, 514 deletions

diff --git a/locale/pt/LC_MESSAGES/_articles/2020-11-14-local-first-software-you-own-your-data-in-spite-of-the-cloud-article-review.po b/locale/pt/LC_MESSAGES/_articles/2020-11-14-local-first-software-you-own-your-data-in-spite-of-the-cloud-article-review.po
deleted file mode 100644
index 03ca2c6..0000000
--- a/locale/pt/LC_MESSAGES/_articles/2020-11-14-local-first-software-you-own-your-data-in-spite-of-the-cloud-article-review.po
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,514 +0,0 @@
-#
-msgid ""
-msgstr ""
-
-msgid ""
-"title: \"Local-First Software: You Own Your Data, in spite of the Cloud - "
-"article review\""
-msgstr ""
-
-msgid "date: 2020-11-14"
-msgstr ""
-
-msgid "layout: post"
-msgstr ""
-
-msgid "lang: en"
-msgstr ""
-
-msgid ""
-"ref: local-first-software-you-own-your-data-in-spite-of-the-cloud-article-"
-"review"
-msgstr ""
-
-msgid "eu_categories: presentation,article review"
-msgstr ""
-
-msgid ""
-"*This article is derived from a [presentation][presentation] given at a "
-"Papers We Love meetup on the same subject.*"
-msgstr ""
-
-msgid ""
-"This is a review of the article \"[Local-First Software: You Own Your Data, "
-"in spite of the Cloud][article-pdf]\", by M. Kleppmann, A. Wiggins, P. Van "
-"Hardenberg and M. F. McGranaghan."
-msgstr ""
-
-msgid "Offline-first, local-first"
-msgstr ""
-
-msgid ""
-"The \"local-first\" term they use isn't new, and I have used it myself in "
-"the past to refer to this types of application, where the data lives "
-"primarily on the client, and there are conflict resolution algorithms that "
-"reconcile data created on different instances."
-msgstr ""
-
-msgid ""
-"Sometimes I see confusion with this idea and \"client-side\", \"offline-"
-"friendly\", \"syncable\", etc. I have myself used this terms, also."
-msgstr ""
-
-msgid ""
-"There exists, however, already the \"offline-first\" term, which conveys "
-"almost all of that meaning. In my view, \"local-first\" doesn't extend "
-"\"offline-first\" in any aspect, rather it gives a well-defined meaning to "
-"it instead. I could say that \"local-first\" is just \"offline-first\", but "
-"with 7 well-defined ideals instead of community best practices."
-msgstr ""
-
-msgid ""
-"[presentation]: {% link _slides/2020-11-14-on-local-first-beyond-the-crdt-"
-"silver-bullet.slides %} [article-pdf]: "
-"https://martin.kleppmann.com/papers/local-first.pdf"
-msgstr ""
-
-msgid "Software licenses"
-msgstr ""
-
-msgid ""
-"On a footnote of the 7th ideal (\"You Retain Ultimate Ownership and "
-"Control\"), the authors say:"
-msgstr ""
-
-msgid ""
-"In our opinion, maintaining control and ownership of data does not mean that"
-" the software must necessarily be open source. (...) as long as it does not "
-"artificially restrict what users can do with their files."
-msgstr ""
-
-msgid ""
-"#!/bin/sh\n"
-"\n"
-"TODAY=$(date +%s)\n"
-"LICENSE_EXPIRATION=$(date -d 2020-11-15 +%s)\n"
-"\n"
-"if [ $TODAY -ge $LICENSE_EXPIRATION ]; then\n"
-"  echo 'License expired!'\n"
-"  exit 1\n"
-"fi\n"
-"\n"
-"echo $((2 + 2))\n"
-msgstr ""
-
-msgid "Now when using this very useful program:"
-msgstr ""
-
-msgid ""
-"# today\n"
-"$ ./useful-adder.sh\n"
-"4\n"
-"# tomorrow\n"
-"$ ./useful-adder.sh\n"
-"License expired!\n"
-msgstr ""
-
-msgid ""
-"This is obviously an intentional restriction, and it goes against the 5th "
-"ideal (\"The Long Now\"). This software would only be useful as long as the "
-"embedded license expiration allowed. Sure you could change the clock on the "
-"computer, but there are many other ways that this type of intentional "
-"restriction is in conflict with that ideal."
-msgstr ""
-
-msgid ""
-"However, what about unintentional restrictions? What if a software had an "
-"equal or similar restriction, and stopped working after days pass? Or what "
-"if the programmer added a constant to make the development simpler, and this"
-" led to unintentionally restricting the user?"
-msgstr ""
-
-msgid ""
-"# today\n"
-"$ useful-program\n"
-"# ...useful output...\n"
-"\n"
-"# tomorrow, with more data\n"
-"$ useful-program\n"
-"ERROR: Panic! Stack overflow!\n"
-msgstr ""
-
-msgid ""
-"An open specification could serve as a blueprint to other implementations, "
-"making the data format more friendly to reverse-engineering. But the re-"
-"implementation still has to exist, at which point the original software "
-"failed to achieve \"The Long Now\"."
-msgstr ""
-
-msgid "It is less bad, but still not quite there yet."
-msgstr ""
-
-msgid "Denial of existing solutions"
-msgstr ""
-
-msgid ""
-"When describing \"Existing Data Storage and Sharing Models\", on a "
-"footnote[^devil] the authors say:"
-msgstr ""
-
-msgid ""
-"[^devil]: This is the second aspect that I'm picking on the article from a "
-"footnote. I guess the devil really is on the details."
-msgstr ""
-
-msgid ""
-"In principle it is possible to collaborate without a repository service, "
-"e.g. by sending patch files by email, but the majority of Git users rely on "
-"GitHub."
-msgstr ""
-
-msgid ""
-"The authors go to a great length to talk about usability of cloud apps, and "
-"even point to research they've done on it, but they've missed learning more "
-"from local-first solutions that already exist."
-msgstr ""
-
-msgid ""
-"Say the automerge CRDT proves to be even more useful than what everybody "
-"imagined. Say someone builds a local-first repository service using it. How "
-"will it change anything of the Git/GitHub model? What is different about it "
-"that prevents people in the future writing a paper saying:"
-msgstr ""
-
-msgid ""
-"In principle it is possible to collaborate without a repository service, "
-"e.g. by using automerge and platform X, but the majority of Git users rely "
-"on GitHub."
-msgstr ""
-
-msgid "How is this any better?"
-msgstr ""
-
-msgid ""
-"If it is already [possible](https://drewdevault.com/2018/07/23/Git-is-"
-"already-distributed.html) to have a local-first development workflow, why "
-"don't people use it? Is it just fashion, or there's a fundamental problem "
-"with it? If so, what is it, and how to avoid it?"
-msgstr ""
-
-msgid ""
-"If sending patches by emails is perfectly possible but out of fashion, why "
-"even talk about Git/GitHub? Isn't this a problem that people are putting "
-"themselves in? How can CRDTs possibly prevent people from doing that?"
-msgstr ""
-
-msgid ""
-"My impression is that the authors envision a better future, where "
-"development is fully decentralized unlike today, and somehow CRDTs will make"
-" that happen. If more people think this way, \"CRDT\" is next in line to the"
-" buzzword list that solves everything, like \"containers\", \"blockchain\" "
-"or \"machine learning\"."
-msgstr ""
-
-msgid ""
-"Rather than picturing an imaginary service that could be described like "
-"\"GitHub+CRDTs\" and people would adopt it, I'd rather better understand why"
-" people don't do it already, since Git is built to work like that."
-msgstr ""
-
-msgid "Ditching of web applications"
-msgstr ""
-
-msgid ""
-"The authors put web application in a worse position for building local-first"
-" application, claiming that:"
-msgstr ""
-
-msgid ""
-"(...) the architecture of web apps remains fundamentally server-centric. "
-"Offline support is an afterthought in most web apps, and the result is "
-"accordingly fragile."
-msgstr ""
-
-msgid "Well, I disagree."
-msgstr ""
-
-msgid ""
-"The problem isn't inherit to the web platform, but instead how people use "
-"it."
-msgstr ""
-
-msgid ""
-"I have myself built offline-first applications, leveraging IndexedDB, App "
-"Cache, *etc*. I wanted to build an offline-first application on the web, and"
-" so I did."
-msgstr ""
-
-msgid ""
-"In fact, many people choose [PouchDB](https://pouchdb.com/) *because* of "
-"that, since it is a good tool for offline-first web applications. The "
-"problem isn't really the technology, but how much people want their "
-"application to be local-first."
-msgstr ""
-
-msgid ""
-"Contrast it with Android [Instant "
-"Apps](https://developer.android.com/topic/google-play-instant), where "
-"applications are sent to the phone in small parts. Since this requires an "
-"internet connection to move from a part of the app bundle to another, a "
-"subset of the app isn't local-first, despite being an app."
-msgstr ""
-
-msgid ""
-"The point isn't the technology, but how people are using it. Local-first web"
-" applications are perfectly possible, just like non-local-first native "
-"applications are possible."
-msgstr ""
-
-msgid "Costs are underrated"
-msgstr ""
-
-msgid ""
-"I think the costs of \"old-fashioned apps\" over \"cloud apps\" are "
-"underrated, mainly regarding storage, and that this costs can vary a lot by "
-"application."
-msgstr ""
-
-msgid ""
-"Say a person writes online articles for their personal website, and puts "
-"everything into Git. Since there isn't supposed to be any collaboration, all"
-" of the relevant ideals of local-first are achieved."
-msgstr ""
-
-msgid ""
-"Now another person creates videos instead of articles. They could try "
-"keeping everything local, but after some time the storage usage fills the "
-"entire disk. This person's local-first setup would be much more complex, and"
-" would cost much more on maintenance, backup and storage."
-msgstr ""
-
-msgid ""
-"Even though both have similar needs, a local-first video repository is much "
-"more demanding. So the local-first thinking here isn't \"just keep "
-"everything local\", but \"how much time and money am I willing to spend to "
-"keep everything local\"."
-msgstr ""
-
-msgid ""
-"The convenience of \"cloud apps\" becomes so attractive that many don't even"
-" have a local copy of their videos, and rely exclusively on service "
-"providers to maintain, backup and store their content."
-msgstr ""
-
-msgid ""
-"The dial measuring \"cloud apps\" and \"old-fashioned apps\" needs to be "
-"specific to use-cases."
-msgstr ""
-
-msgid "Real-time collaboration is optional"
-msgstr ""
-
-msgid ""
-"If I were the one making the list of ideals, I wouldn't focus so much on "
-"real-time collaboration."
-msgstr ""
-
-msgid ""
-"Even though seamless collaboration is desired, it being real-time depends on"
-" the network being available for that. But ideal 3 states that \"The Network"
-" is Optional\", so real-time collaboration is also optional."
-msgstr ""
-
-msgid ""
-"The fundamentals of a local-first system should enable real-time "
-"collaboration when network is available, but shouldn't focus on it."
-msgstr ""
-
-msgid ""
-"On many places when discussing applications being offline, it is common for "
-"me to find people saying that their application works \"even on a plane, "
-"subway or elevator\". That is a reflection of when said developers have to "
-"deal with networks being unavailable."
-msgstr ""
-
-msgid ""
-"When discussing \"working offline\", I'd rather keep this type of person in "
-"mind, then the subset of people who are offline when on the elevator will "
-"naturally be included."
-msgstr ""
-
-msgid "On CRDTs and developer experience"
-msgstr ""
-
-msgid ""
-"When discussing developer experience, the authors bring up some questions to"
-" be answered further, like:"
-msgstr ""
-
-msgid ""
-"For an app developer, how does the use of a CRDT-based data layer compare to"
-" existing storage layers like a SQL database, a filesystem, or CoreData? Is "
-"a distributed system harder to write software for?"
-msgstr ""
-
-msgid "That is an easy one: yes."
-msgstr ""
-
-msgid ""
-"A distributed system *is* harder to write software for, being a distributed "
-"system."
-msgstr ""
-
-msgid "Conclusion"
-msgstr ""
-
-msgid ""
-"I liked a lot the article, as it took the \"offline-first\" philosophy and "
-"ran with it."
-msgstr ""
-
-msgid ""
-"But I think the authors' view of adding CRDTs and things becoming local-"
-"first is a bit too magical."
-msgstr ""
-
-msgid ""
-"It is a step forward, and given the number of times I've seen the paper "
-"shared around I think there's a chance people will prefer saying \"local-"
-"first\" in *lieu* of \"offline-first\" from now on."
-msgstr ""
-
-msgid ""
-"They give examples of artificial restrictions, like this artificial "
-"restriction I've come up with:"
-msgstr ""
-
-msgid ""
-"Just as easily as I can come up with ways to intentionally restrict users, I"
-" can do the same for unintentionally restrictions. A program can stop "
-"working for a variety of reasons."
-msgstr ""
-
-msgid ""
-"If it stops working due do, say, data growth, what are the options? "
-"Reverting to an earlier backup, and making it read-only? That isn't really a"
-" \"Long Now\", but rather a \"Long Now as long as the software keeps working"
-" as expected\"."
-msgstr ""
-
-msgid ""
-"A colleague has challenged my view, arguing that the software doesn't really"
-" need to be free, as long as there is an specification of the file format. "
-"This way if the software stops working, the format can still be processed by"
-" other programs. But this doesn't apply in practice: if you have a document "
-"that you write to, and software stops working, you still want to write to "
-"the document. An external tool that navigates the content and shows it to "
-"you won't allow you to keep writing, and when it does that tool is now "
-"starting to re-implement the software."
-msgstr ""
-
-msgid ""
-"But this leaves out a big chunk of the world where internet connection is "
-"intermittent, or only works every other day or only once a week, or stops "
-"working when it rains, *etc*. For this audience, living without network "
-"connectivity isn't such a discrete moment in time, but part of every day "
-"life. I like the fact that the authors acknowledge that."
-msgstr ""
-
-msgid ""
-"Adding a large layer of data structures and algorithms will make it more "
-"complex to write software for, naturally. And if trying to make this layer "
-"transparent to the programmer, so they can pretend that layer doesn't exist "
-"is a bad idea, as RPC frameworks have tried, and failed."
-msgstr ""
-
-msgid ""
-"See \"[A Note on Distributed "
-"Computing](https://web.archive.org/web/20130116163535/http://labs.oracle.com/techrep/1994/smli_tr-94-29.pdf)\""
-" for a critique on RPC frameworks trying to make the network invisible, "
-"which I think also applies in equivalence for making the CRDTs layer "
-"invisible."
-msgstr ""
-
-msgid ""
-"This particular area is one that I have large interest on, and I wish to see"
-" more being done on the \"local-first\" space."
-msgstr ""
-
-msgid ""
-"The point is: if the software isn't free, \"The Long Now\" isn't achievable "
-"without a lot of wishful thinking. Maybe the authors were trying to be more "
-"friendly towards business who don't like free software, but in doing so "
-"they've proposed a contradiction by reconciling \"The Long Now\" with "
-"proprietary software."
-msgstr ""
-
-msgid ""
-"It isn't the same as saying that any free software achieves that ideal, "
-"either. The license can still be free, but the source code can become "
-"unavailable due to cloud rot. Or maybe the build is undocumented, or the "
-"build tools had specific configuration that one has to guess. A piece of "
-"free software can still fail to achieve \"The Long Now\". Being free doesn't"
-" guarantee it, just makes it possible."
-msgstr ""
-
-#~ msgid ""
-#~ "The point is: if the software isn't free/libre, \"The Long Now\" isn't "
-#~ "achievable without a lot of wishful thinking. Maybe the authors were trying "
-#~ "to be more friendly towards business who don't like libre software, but in "
-#~ "doing so they've proposed a contradiction by reconciling \"The Long Now\" "
-#~ "with proprietary software."
-#~ msgstr ""
-
-#~ msgid ""
-#~ "It isn't the same as saying that any free/libre software achieves that "
-#~ "ideal, either. The license can still be free, but the source code can become"
-#~ " unavailable due to cloud rot. Or maybe the build is undocumented, or the "
-#~ "build tools had specific configuration that one has to guess. A piece of "
-#~ "free/libre software can still fail to achieve \"The Long Now\". Being free "
-#~ "doesn't guarantee it, just makes it possible."
-#~ msgstr ""
-
-#~ msgid "They give examples of artificial restrictions, like this one:"
-#~ msgstr ""
-
-#~ msgid ""
-#~ "Just as easily as I can come up with ways to intentionally restrict users, "
-#~ "just as easily I can do the same for unintentionally restricting users. A "
-#~ "program can stop working for a variety of reasons."
-#~ msgstr ""
-
-#~ msgid ""
-#~ "If it stops working due do data growth, what are the options? Reverting to "
-#~ "an earlier backup, and making it read-only? That isn't really a \"Long "
-#~ "Now\", but rather a \"Long Now as long as the software keeps working as "
-#~ "expected\"."
-#~ msgstr ""
-
-#~ msgid ""
-#~ "A colleague has challenged my view, arguing that the software doesn't really"
-#~ " need to be free, as long as there is an specification of the file format. "
-#~ "This way is the software stops working, the format can still be processed by"
-#~ " other programs. But this doesn't apply in practice: if you have a document "
-#~ "that you write to, and software stops working, you still want to write to "
-#~ "the document. An external tool that navigates the content and shows it to "
-#~ "you won't allow you to keep writing, and when it does that tool is now "
-#~ "starting to re-implement the software."
-#~ msgstr ""
-
-#~ msgid ""
-#~ "But this leaves out a big chunk of the world where internet connection is "
-#~ "intermittent, or only work every other day or only once a week, or stops "
-#~ "working when it rains, *etc*. For this audience, living without network "
-#~ "connectivity isn't such a discrete moment in time, but part of every day "
-#~ "life. I like the fact that the authors acknowledge that."
-#~ msgstr ""
-
-#~ msgid ""
-#~ "Adding a large layer of data structures and algorithms will make it more "
-#~ "complex to write software for, naturally. And if trying to make this layer "
-#~ "transparent to the programmer, so they can pretend that layer doesn't exist "
-#~ "is a bad idea, as RPC frameworks have tried, and failed. See \"[A Note on "
-#~ "Distributed "
-#~ "Computing](https://web.archive.org/web/20130116163535/http://labs.oracle.com/techrep/1994/smli_tr-94-29.pdf)\""
-#~ " for a critique on RPC frameworks trying to make the network invisible, "
-#~ "which I think also applies in equivalence for making the CRDTs layer "
-#~ "invisible."
-#~ msgstr ""
-
-#~ msgid ""
-#~ "It is a step forward, and given the number of times I've seen the paper "
-#~ "shared around I think there's a chance people will prefer saying \"local-"
-#~ "first\" in lieu of \"offline-first\" from now on."
-#~ msgstr ""