|
PleasureKevin posted:whats the deal with people not knowing git? Lmao if you think you know git. I know how to commit things in git. I know how to not break things terribly. That's knowing git I guess
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2015 10:26
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 22:32 |
|
|
MALE SHOEGAZE posted:Lmao if you think you know git. same
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2015 11:12
|
|
|
I've been continuously doing interviews and code challenges and poo poo regardless. I seemingly have another freelance gig lined up after this one but experience tells me to leave all options open. I've even done interviews after accepting another offer just for the experience. so definitely stay active.
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2015 11:46
|
|
|
MALE SHOEGAZE posted:Lmao if you think you know git. um... I can also branch, checkout, merge, set remote, push, pull, view history, add, comment... and that's about it oh and I've only ever worked by myself with git so it's all a colossal waste of time
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2015 11:50
|
|
|
~Coxy posted:2. clearcase is actually pretty good as a source control system as a user, it's just a pain as a sysadmin lol nope, it's just plain horrible. sry about your stockholm syndrome
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2015 13:34
|
|
|
you don't have PMs so here's a thing
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2015 17:59
|
|
|
PleasureKevin posted:um... I can also branch, checkout, merge, set remote, push, pull, view history, add, comment... and that's about it You skipped revert and reset. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2015 20:44
|
|
|
Luigi Thirty posted:so here is where i am at. the place that was hiring me for that jr. developer/support janitor thing still hasn't sent me a job offer letter. i asked why last week, they said they needed "final budgetary approval" for it (which they claimed to have received) and i should have it by the end of this week but i still don't have anything. no start date, no salary, nothing. i'm not sure if they're stalling, jerking me around, or are just run by clowns. in the meantime, i got contacted by a recruiter today for a jr. c# developer position with a big financial company located in the same city that i was speaking to last month saying they wanted to bring me in for an interview. i'm not sure what to do! You'd be using C# which is cool and good, so yes you should do the interview
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2015 21:06
|
|
|
triple sulk posted:You'd be using C# which is cool and good, so yes you should do the interview i hate agreeing with sulk but he's right
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2015 21:26
|
|
|
Luigi Thirty posted:i got contacted by a recruiter today for a jr. c# developer position with a big financial company located in the same city that i was speaking to last month saying they wanted to bring me in for an interview. i'm not sure what to do! well youre unemployed so I'd say go for the job interview
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2015 21:43
|
|
|
i don't think i've used revert lol also to follow up on what i said about topcoder earlier topcoder is i guess ironically terribly coded. it's a terrible site that breaks all the time. you can do design challenges there too, and the site is also poorly designed. the challenge i did went terribly. my submission didn't pass screening and nobody won at all. they got lots of complaints and had to extend the due date and raise the prize like 3 times. it was an "HTML/CSS" job, but apparently i was supposed to make login actually work somehow, which wasn't mentioned anywhere. i tried to appeal, but the moderator said "you were supposed to use angular", indicating he/she didn't even install the app or read the README or even look in the file system to see it was indeed an angular app. they are repeating the challenge again, but i don't think i have time to apply or edit my submission. which is too bad because i actually did make some of the features work as a bonus, and built a small node server with API. it was a pixel-perfect recreation of the mock-ups too in pure CSS.
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2015 21:47
|
|
|
git suicide
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2015 22:41
|
|
|
git erdun
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2015 22:52
|
|
|
cool thing you can do in git w/ rebase -i:
svn does not work very well for this because it encourages munging refactorings and actual functional changes together this is only important if you care about being able to more easily code review or pick out functional changes in your commit history
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2015 23:42
|
|
|
svn generally encourages giant commits instead of more granular commits because youre forced to push if you want to save your work as a commit git allows things like having incremental commits that you can revert back to at any time if you make a mistake and you aren't done w/ your feature yet svn has some really stupid things like not being able to go back to your functioning working copy w/ in-progress changes before a pull destroys your working copy. sure you can see if there are changes before you pull, but if you resolve any conflicts and pull you can still be in a hosed up state that is more difficult to recover from than if you could just go back to before it was hosed up. some people will copy their entire working directory to another directory before a pull to mitigate this issue
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2015 23:47
|
|
|
get is really good because of this totally contrived edge i just came up with!! happens once every two years but man when it does you're glad yr usin' git i tell ya what!
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2015 23:53
|
|
|
this is a use case every time you want to make small incremental changes without being forced to mix your changes w/ everyone else's poo poo yet svn you just accept your fate and make giant commits that do a whole bunch of poo poo at once and accept that your commit is going to be much harder to read once you do a pull and there are conflicts
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2015 23:56
|
|
|
this is also a use case if you have a development team size of one
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2015 00:01
|
|
|
the fear of commiting something that isn't perfect is absolutely retarded and isn't a reason to have local commits
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2015 00:04
|
|
|
also if you have conflicts then you're design is bad and also git will make your conflicts even worse because you will go longer between merges
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2015 00:05
|
|
|
i think attempting to merge and branch in svn gives you ptsd that you try to avoid it as much as possible
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2015 00:07
|
|
|
also i agree very frequent merge conflicts means your poo poo is probably all hosed up that doesnt mean you have to have a horrible solution for resolving merges
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2015 00:11
|
|
|
local commits are for checkpointing when things work, so that when you later discover that something else doesn't work you can figure out where it went wrong. bisecting is love.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2015 00:26
|
|
|
in svn you can't push your working changes and then have someone review a logical commit history of 5 different incremental commits before it gets merged into trunk in svn you have to have someone sit at your box before you push and look at one giant commit or you send them a patch file through e-mail or some process outside of your version control system. you also need to write down what particular commit this was created from, and your commit represented by the patch file is subject to change if there are merge conflicts after the review. in git you can actually push the merge along w/ the 5 incremental commits for review without actually pushing it to trunk yet alternatively, you could use svn's horrible branching model and push 5 incremental commits to this branch and then have someone review it but svn's branch merging is so bad the general recommended practice is to not branch it's obnoxious to get back the history of that branch in svn after you delete it comedyblissoption fucked around with this message at 00:36 on Jan 18, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2015 00:32
|
|
|
Shaggar posted:the fear of commiting something that isn't perfect is absolutely retarded and isn't a reason to have local commits
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2015 00:46
|
|
|
but being able to have version control while programming on an airplane is pretty cool I understand programming on transpacific flights is a terrible edge case
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2015 00:50
|
|
|
comedyblissoption posted:svn generally encourages giant commits instead of more granular commits because youre forced to push if you want to save your work as a commit no, thats just you being retarded. commit when you want to commit. quote:git allows things like having incremental commits that you can revert back to at any time if you make a mistake and you aren't done w/ your feature yet svn has this too! quote:svn has some really stupid things like not being able to go back to your functioning working copy w/ in-progress changes before a pull destroys your working copy. ???
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2015 00:51
|
|
|
hobbesmaster posted:but being able to have version control while programming on an airplane is pretty cool you can do this with svn too, file:// repos have been a thing since version whatever
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2015 00:52
|
|
|
comedyblissoption posted:in svn you can't push your working changes and then have someone review a logical commit history of 5 different incremental commits before it gets merged into trunk im not even gonna point by point this poo poo any more because its manifestly obvious that you have no idea how subversion works
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2015 00:53
|
|
|
the cool thing about ignorance is that people are so eager to share it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2015 00:54
|
|
|
In you lots opinion's are there any emerging development languages/techniques that are 'cutting edge' (and actually good) and actually being used irl. The sort of thing that is accessible enough to learn on your own with a months study then stick on your cv and apply for jobs for. Id like to have a bash at being ahead of the curve for a change.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2015 00:58
|
|
|
PleasingFungus posted:you don't have PMs so here's a thing 
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2015 01:00
|
|
|
Seaside Loafer posted:In you lots opinion's are there any emerging development languages/techniques that are 'cutting edge' (and actually good) and actually being used irl. c#
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2015 01:01
|
|
|
done that, lots e: ive heard whispers of some new natural language stuff but dunno what to look for, but im after something monetisable Seaside Loafer fucked around with this message at 01:04 on Jan 18, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2015 01:02
|
|
|
Serious question, how does code review (real code review, the kind where you have someone review and sign off on it before the code actually gets added to trunk) work with svn? With git you have a branch with your proposed change and your reviewer looks at that and pulls it to the master repo if they think it's good. But it sounds like actually using svn branches is discouraged over on that side of things?
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2015 01:05
|
|
|
Jabor posted:Serious question, how does code review (real code review, the kind where you have someone review and sign off on it before the code actually gets added to trunk) work with svn? you seriously can't think of any other workflow? you do code reviews any way you want, but you can do it that way in svn too. got, or really hg for me just has shinier tools and free hosting
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2015 01:06
|
|
|
In SVN this can happen:
In git this is trivial and you just reset to before the merge In git you can easily flip back to your good working state and your in-progress merge and also share this with other people comedyblissoption fucked around with this message at 01:18 on Jan 18, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2015 01:12
|
|
|
Jabor posted:Serious question, how does code review (real code review, the kind where you have someone review and sign off on it before the code actually gets added to trunk) work with svn?
comedyblissoption fucked around with this message at 01:19 on Jan 18, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2015 01:13
|
|
|
comedyblissoption posted:
maybe stop listening to the recommendations of idiots, that's my advice code review in svn works in exactly the same way that gitlabs does. You put your poo poo on a branch and have someone do a code review, then you merge it. But at some point, idiots like comedybitchoption who have no idea how svn works started saying that branching was super hard in svn, and for some reason people listened to them.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2015 01:23
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 22:32 |
|
|
Branching and merging still kinda sucks in svn even though it's much better since like 2009 or so. Seriously though local branches and commits are a good thing why is this seriously being argued against.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2015 06:12
|
|
