When you stare into git, git stares back.

It's fucking infinite.

Me 2 years ago:
"uh was it git fetch or git pull?"

Me 1 year ago:
"Look, I printed these 5 git commands on a laptop sticker, this is all I need for my workflow! branch, pull, commit, merge, push! Git is easy!"

Me now:
"Hold my beer, I'll just do git format-patch -k --stdout HEAD..feature -- script.js | git am -3 -k to steal that file from your branch, then git rebase master && git rebase -i HEAD~$(git rev-list --count master..HEAD) to clean up the commit messages, and a git branch --merged | grep -v "\*" | xargs -n 1 git branch -d to clean up the branches, oh lets see how many words you've added with git diff --word-diff=porcelain | grep -e '^+[^+]' | wc -w, hmm maybe I should alias some of this stuff..."

Do you have any git tricks/favorites which you use so often that you've aliased them?

So I'm working as a self taught developer at my first job.

There is this guy with apparently 8 years experience in Java. He has been telling me to get a degree as no one will offer me a job and blah blah heard it a million times from a lot of people don't care.

Ok back to the point.

That guy doesn't know how to use git. Doesn't know what branches are. Pushes straight to master without doing a git pull, breaks master then cries why it doesn't work.

When he pushes anything, he tells others to not push as he's pushing and that everyone should save their stuff and push after he's done.

Once I was working with him and he was about to leave for some days. I had to work on what he was working.

So I tell him to push whatever he's done on his branch and I'll continue on it but oh no no, he says.
Him: I can't push as I haven't completed it.
Me: Duh. That's why I'll work on it.
Him: but i can't commit half of it to master.
Me: master? Create your own branch.
Him: *cricket sounds*
Me: alright. You pack things up I'll create it for you. (Ends up creating a branch and commiting stuff)

It's ironic how the people who persist on telling me to get a degree can't work the basic things out while having one.

Alright we're not using master now. Branch permissions thank you. But the point remains. He does the same with the dev branch.

Gitkraken because it makes working with branches, submodules, merging, amending, rebasing, squashing, stashing etc. super easy and visual. Especially useful in huge projects.

When you accidentally merged two git branches of different repositories.

Git makes it easy to search through historical changes they said. Git is amazing when working in teams they said.

It sure is.

If your coworkers do not commit every time they burp or fart, do not use "🚀" or "✨" or "fix" as a commit message, and do not push all their shitty experimental broken branches without cleaning up.

I'm surprised there are no piles of fecal matter behind their desk chairs.

Create branches with name of girls and later check them out.

Unpopular opinion about Microsoft buying GitHub.

Just putting it out there that when you made your github repos you did so under their privacy policy and terms and will be protected under those in the future, and that both GitHub and Microsoft are corporations with the goals of making money.

Are people seriously mad that their code has gone from one capitalist corporation to another, with no foreseeable change in privacy or data policy? I have respect for those that switched to self hosted long ago since that's going from corporate to private, but if you throw away the UX and community GitHub has developed because a multinational corporation (with so many branches, products and divisions, which happens to have a few products you don't like) will soon own it, are you actually making a rational, guided decision?

Also just throwing it out there that GitLab is also a company. They've also had issues with keeping data intact in the past. They do, however, have free private repos (although I can't ever trust someone who gives me "free" privacy) as well as builtin CI. There are some definite upsides to it, although the UX has a ton of differences. If you're expecting the same dashboard and workflow you've used on GitHub, don't, GitLab has cool features but the bells and whistles aren't the exact same.

If you're switching to GitLab solely because of Microsoft, step back and think, regardless of how popular it might make you to hate Microsoft, is it really worth changing your development ecosystem to go from one corporate entity to another solely because you don't like the company?

I use GitLab and GitBub as well as Bitbucket and selfhosted git on a daily basis. They each have their upsides and downsides; but I think switching from one to the other solely because of Microsoft is not only totally irrational, but really makes light of/disrespects the amazing tools and UX the teams behind each one have carefully developed. Pick your Git hosting based on features and what works out for your use case, not because of which corporate overlord has their name plastered on it.

(Also just throwing it out there that lots of devs love VS Code, and that's Microsoft owned too... They did also build and pioneer a bunch of really cool shit for devs including Typescript so it's not like they're evil or incapable in any sense?)

So in Telegram there is this funny little game called Lumberjack where you need to click left and right to cut the branches. My and my fellow students played this in the group. Then I got bored for like 30 minutes and decided to write a little bot which checks where the branches are with pixel detection and sends a left/right click to the window. Imagine my friends faces when all of sudden my score was 500+ and the character ran through this like a fucking jackhammer :D
#justmebeingaprogrammer

Today a Coworker got a little piece of paper acknowledging that he was a Git master, two hours later he fucked up all the branches.

!rant
!!git

Who here uses `master` for development?

My boss (api guy) tried to convince me that was normal practice. I gently told him that it sounded crazy and very very bad.

Here's the dev path I'm enforcing on my repos:

(feature branches) -> dev -> qa* -> master -> production*

*: the build server auto-pulls from these branches, and pushes any passing builds to staging/production.

Everyone works on their own feature branches, and when they're happy with their work, they merge it into `dev`. `dev`, therefore, is for feature integration testing. After everything is working well on `dev`, it gets merged into `qa` for the testers to fawn over and beat with sticks. Anything that passes QA gets merged into `master`, where it sits until we're ready to release it. When that time comes (it's usually right away, but not always), `master` gets merged into `production`.

This way, `master` is always stable and contains the newest code, so it's perfect for forking/etc. Is this standard practice, or should I be doing something different?

Also, api guy encourages something he calls "running a racetrack" -- each dev has their own branch (their initials) and they push to that throughout the day. everyone else pulls from it regularly and pushes to their own branch. When anyone's happy with their code, they push from their (updated) branch to `qa` (I insisted on `dev` instead.)

Supposedly this drastically reduces the number of merge conflicts when pushing to an upstream branch due to having a more recent ancestor node?

I don't quite follow that, but it seems to me that merging/pushing throughout the day would just make them happen sooner? idk.

What are your thoughts?

rant? rant!

I work for a company that develops a variety of software solutions for companies of varying sizes. The company has three people in charge, and small teams that each worked on a certain project. 9 months ago I joined the company as a junior developer, and coincidentally, we also started working on our biggest project so far - an online platform for buying groceries from a variety of vendors/merchants and having them be delivered to your doorstep on the same day (hadn't been done to this scale in Estonia yet). One of the people from management joined the team working on that. The company that ordered this is coincidentally being run by one of the richest men in Estonia. The platform included both the actual website for customers to use, a logistics system for routing between the merchants, the warehouse, and the customers, as well as a bunch of mobile apps for the couriers, warehouse personnel, etc. It was built on Node.js with Hapi (for the backend stuff), Angular 2 (for all the UIs, including the apps which are run through a WebView wrapper), and PostgreSQL (for the database). The deadline for the MVP we (read: the management) gave them, but we finished it in about 7 months in a team of five.

The hours were insane, from 10 AM to 10 PM if lucky. When we weren't lucky (which was half of the time, if not more), we had to work until anywhere from 12 PM to 3 AM, sometimes even the whole night. The weekends weren't any better, for the majority of the time we had to put in even more extra hours on the weekends. Luckily, we were paid extra for them, but the salary was no way near fair (the majority of the team earned about 1000€/mo after taxes in a country where junior developers usually earn 1500€/month). Also because of the short deadline given to us, we skipped all the important parts like writing tests, doing CI, code reviews, feature branching/PR's, etc. I tried pushing the team and the management to at least write tests and make feature branches/PRs, but the management always told me that there wasn't enough time to coordinate and work on all that, that we'll do that after launching the MVP, etc. We basically just wrote features, tested them by hand, and pushed into the "test" branch which would later get tested and merged into master.

During development, one of the other juniors managed to write the worst kind of Angular code you could imagine - enormous amounts of duplication, no reusable components (every view contained the everything used in the view, so popups and other parts that should logically be reusable were in every view separately), fuck - even the HTML was broken (the most memorable for me were the "table > tr > div > td" ones, but that's barely scratching the surface). He left a few months into the project, and we had to build upon his shit, ever so slightly trying to fix the shit he produced. This could have definitely been avoided if we did code reviews.

A month after launching the MVP for internal testing, the guy working on the logistics system had burned out and left the company (he's earning more than twice the salary he got here, happy for him, he is a great coder and an even better team player). This could have been avoided if this project had been planned better, but I can't really blame them, since it was the first project they had at this scale (even though they had given longer deadlines for projects way smaller than this).

After we finished and launched the MVP, the second guy from management joined, because he saw we needed extra help. Again I tried to push us into investing the time to write tests for the system (because at this point we had created an unstable cluster fuck of a codebase), but again to no avail. The same "no time, just test it manually for now, we'll do that later when we have time" bullshit from management.

Now, a few weeks ago, the third guy from management joined. He saw what a disaster our whole project was. Him joining was simply a blessing from the skies. He started off by writing migrations using sequelize. I talked to him about writing tests and everything, and he actually listened. He told me that I'm gonna be the one writing them, and also talked to the rest of management about it. I was overjoyed. I could actually hear the bitterness in the voices of the rest of management when they told me how to write the tests, what to test, etc. But I didn't give a flying rat's ass, I was hapi.

I was told to start off by writing a smoke test for the whole client flow using Puppeteer. I got even happier, since I was finally able to again learn new things (this stopped at about 4 or 5 months into the project).

I'm using jest as the framework and started writing the tests in TypeScript. Later I found a library called jest-extended, but it didn't have type defs, so I decided to write them and, for the first time in my life, contribute to the open source community.

Me: *Installs travis*

Dev: oh what's travis?

Me: it's a continuous integration tool I wanna setup.

Dev: ... contin.... ?

Me: continuous integration, a tool that performs builds.

Dev: ah!, is it the new version of that deprecated tool we were using "client access"?

Me: ... no ... that's an authentication service that generates and stores oauth tokens. This is the continuous integration tool I told you about yesterday (and last week and the week before).

Dev: ... contin....

Me: ... con ........ continuous integration. It listens to branches on GitHub, downloads, builds, tests and then deploys the code.

Dev: ah ok ok, cool.

I would bet my monthly fucking salary he can not repeat what I said, tell me what oauth is, or explain what he's working on at the minute.

Jesus at this rate I'd bet my salary he can't tell me my name.

I stare through the blueish black backgrounds and blurry colorful syntax into a somewhat familiar office within a mirrored world. That damned reflective glass layer covering these meaningless pixels is certainly not on my side.

The rushing sound of transactions flowing through cables is silenced today. Some blood cloth in the invoicing system is zeroing out everything after the currency mark.

While sighing I spin a one-and-a-half pirouette on my desk chair — even when desperate, you shouldn't give up on style — I take three steps away from my screen and try to harmonize my thoughts.

So much noise, everywhere... Noise from within?

I have been stuck at the apogee of an inhale for a while now. Locked into some masochistic constriction, self-punishment for the blindness which stings my ego.

Just fucking take a deep breath you asshole...

I freeze in place, and fall backwards.

Patterns on the creamy drywall rapidly vibrate and synchronize on vivid rhythms of respiration and resonating basslines. Deep indigo rainbows ripple through tiny veins, in-between chalky grains, raining as fine magenta dust through the ceiling frames.

My bare feet slide over soft oscillating concrete, fine flows of unsievable sand surrounded by toes, toes surrounded by streaming variables veiled in obscure vile abstractions.

A jadegreen field of vectored compressions resiliently rumbles and bounces through the clearances and corners of the vibrant concrete office cave, whispering in tongues. I try to voice my woes in little blips and bleeps but I seem to be missing an asymmetric key to their shrouded sequenced speech.

Suddenly, a wild turbulence breaks up all signals.

Joanna floats by in her tipsy effervescent cloud of disordered black hair and alcohol perfume, one hand grasping grapes, her other waving at me.

With every finger she moves a thousand tensors propagating paradoxically flawed but perfect pieces of an intricate surreal picture, sketching whole constellations of possible paths throughout the leafs of the giant Ficus next to her desk.

She stops dead in her tracks, and asks somewhat hypocritically: "Are you high?"

I can not discern the meaning of her words, and respond stoically.

"Joanna! Check out those branches!".

"Pun intended?", she giggles.

I'm focused on her grapeless hand, her fingers stretching to reach the lush little tree.

On touch, the plant shivers, grappled in the tight net of the puppet master. She pulls her strings, applying measured weights, all nodes normalize, and Joanna speaks in an oddly soft tone:

"Isn't it beautiful, how so many models emulate nature"

Her cheek buried in foliage she babbles on about unbalanced search trees and machine learning models... but from the tips of her fingers tables and indexes flow into the plant. Users, payments, tariffs, invoices and taxes crawl over the bark, joining at thicker branches, joining at the stem....

Joining. JOINING. A JOIN.

"IF THERE'S NO FUCKING TAX MULTIPLIER IN THIS LEFT JOIN, EVERYTHING COALESCES TO ZERO" I shout at a perplexed Joanna who squeezes grape juice over her desk. I hop on the beat to my keyboard. She looks puzzled, hugs her Ficus tightly, and reaches for the whiskey bottle behind her monitor.

Attracted by my exclamation, Tom from finance swings open the door, while I push my branch.

I look at Joanna still half hiding between the leaves, and I laugh at her: "Branches! Oh, lame, I finally got it!"

Tom's heavy voice interrupts me: "Does this mean... does this mean that the invoicing bug is resolved?".

I smile at Tom with his tailored suit and waxed hair. "The money is flowing once more. All debts are being settled."

He releases his breath in relief, which he seems to have held since that morning as well.

Joanna adds: "Although I think he is forever indebted to my Ficus".

I nod.

This was my day at work today
-Be me at work
-Use git terminal on WORK PROVIDED MacBook
-Decide to clone into a repo into another repo as it was one project inside another project
-Makes changes to code
-Attempts to add .
- warning: adding embedded git repo ...
-Apparently needs submodules
-Shit doesn't get added
-During this get asked to create 2 new branches and modify some code
-Do that specifying files to add as add . breaks everything
-Has 3 branches now detached from master
-Super confused where anything is and what's going on
-Go back to branch for other repo to get added to
-Spends 30 minutes trying to understand submodules
-Gives up and deletes folder moving it elsewhere
-Commits begin failing everywhere. Super confused.
-Get everything figured out and commiting
-Goto merge all branches to master
-Merge conflict with .DS_Store
-FML

I think I'm done guys

friend: so how are we gonna do this project together? download, edit then upload to google drive again. thats the fastest way.

me: how about git?

friend: what?

me: ill just create a repository and create branches before we merge it with master. no need to go through that process of downloading and uploading multiple times

friend: not sure... what... that.. is.....

me: oh we have a looooong way to go, ill guess ill have to teach u git right from the beginning

I've had many, but this is one of my favorite "OK, I'm getting fired for this" moments.

A new team in charge of source control and development standards came up with a 20 page work-instruction document for the new TFS source control structure.
The source control kingpin came from semi-large military contract company where taking a piss was probably outlined somewhere.

Maybe twice, I merged down from a release branch when I should have merged down from a dev branch, which "messed up" the flow of code that one team was working on.
Each time I was 'coached' and reminded on page 13, paragraph 5, sub-section C ... "When merging down from release, you must verify no other teams are working
on branches...blah blah blah..and if they have pending changes, use a shelfset and document the changes using Document A234-B..."

A fellow dev overheard the kingpin and the department manager in the breakroom saying if I messed up TFS one more time, I was gone.

Wasn't two days later I needed to merge up some new files to Main, and 'something' happened in TFS and a couple of files didn't get merged up. No errors, nothing.
Another team was waiting on me, so I simply added the files directly into Main. Unknown to me, the kingpin had a specific alert in TFS to notify him when someone added
files directly into Main, and I get a visit.

KP: "Did you add a couple of files directly into Main?"
Me:"Yes, I don't what happened, but the files never made it from my branch, to dev, to the review shelfset, and then to Main. I never got an error, but since
they were new files and adding a new feature, they never broke a build. Adding the files directly allowed the Web team to finish their project and deploy the
site this morning."
KP: "That is in direct violation of the standard. Didn't you read the documentation?"
Me: "Uh...well...um..yes, but that is an oddly specific case. I didn't think I hurt any.."
KP: "Ha ha...hurt? That's why we have standards. The document clearly states on page 18, paragraph 9, no files may ever be created in Main."
Me: "Really? I don't remember reading that."
<I navigate to the document, page 18, paragraph 9>
Me: "Um...no, it doesn't say that. The document only talks about merging process from a lower branch to Main."
KP: "Exactly. It is forbidden to create files directly in Main."
Me: "No, doesn't say that anywhere."
KP: "That is the spirit of the document. You violated the spirit of what we're trying to accomplish here."
Me: "You gotta be fracking kidding me."

KP grumbles something, goes back to his desk. Maybe a minute later he leaves the IS office, and the department manager leaves his office.

It was after 5:00PM, they never came back, so I headed home worried if I had a job in the morning.

I decided to come in a little early to snoop around, I knew where HR kept their terminated employee documents, and my badge wouldn't let me in the building.

Oh crap.

It was a shift change, so was able to walk in with the warehouse workers in another part of the building (many knew me, so nothing seemed that odd), and to my desk.

I tried to log into my computer...account locked. Oh crap..this was it. I'm done. I fill my computer backpack with as much personal items as I could, and started down the hallway when I meet one of our FS accountants.

L: "Hey, did your card let you in the building this morning? Mine didn't work. I had to walk around to the warehouse entrance and my computer account is locked. None of us can get into the system."

*whew!* is an understatement. Found out later the user account server crashed, which locked out everybody.

Never found out what kingpin and the dev manager left to talk about, but I at least still had a job.

Git branches be so messed up, Its like sisters are marrying cousin's of brother's aunt's nephew's twice removed conjoined twins.

aslkfjasf. i've spent 12 hours today (and lots more over the past two days) trying to reproduce a bug that my [sort of] coworker insists is present. I haven't seen any proof of it anywhere, let alone steps to reproduce it.

I've poured through the code, following all of its tangled noodles of madness from start to fuck-this-shit. I've read and reread the pile of demon excrement so many times i can still read the code when i close my eyes. so. not. kidding.

anyway, the coworker person is getting mad because i haven't fixed the bug after days, and haven't even reproduced it yet. This feature is already taking way too fucking long so I totally don't blame him. but urghh it's like trying to unwind a string someone tied into a tight little ball of knots because they were bored.

but i just figured out why I haven't been able to reproduce it.

the stupid fucking unreliable dipshit ex-"i'm a rockstar and my code rocks"-CTO buffoon (aka API Guy, aka the `a=b if a!=b`loody pointless waste of mixed spaces and tabs) that wrote the original APIs ... 'kay, i need to stop for breath.

The dumbfuck wrote the APIs (which I based the new ones on mostly wholesale because wtf messy?), but he never implemented a very fucking important feature for a specific merchant type. It works for literally every type except the (soon-to-be) most common one. and it just so happens that i need that very specific feature to reproduce this bug.

Why is that one specific merchant type handled so differently? No fucking idea.

But exactly how they're handled differently is why I'm so fking pissed off. It's his error checking. (Some) of his functions return different object types (hash, database object, string, nullable bool, ...) depending on what happened. like, when creating a new gift, it (eventually...) either returns a new Gift object or a string error basically saying "ahhh everything's broken again!" -- which is never displayed, compared against, or recorded anywhere, ofc. Here, the API expects a Hash. That particular function call *always* returns a Hash, no matter what happens in the myriad, twisting, and interwoven branches the code could take. So the check is completely pointless.

EXCEPT. if an object associated with another object associated with the passed object (yep) has a type of 8. in which case, one of the methods in the chain returns a PrintQueue that gets passed back up the call stack. implicitly, and nested three levels in. ofc.

And if the API doesn't get its precious Hash, it exclaims that the merchant itself is broken, and tells the user to contact support. despite, you know, the PrintQueue showing that everything worked perfectly. In fact, that merchant's printer will be happily printing away in the background.

All because type checking is this guy's preferred method of detecting errors. (Raise? what's that? OOP? Nah, let's do diverging splintered-monolithic with some Ruby objects thrown in.)

just.
what the crap.

people should keep their mental diarrhea away from their keyboards.

Anyway. the summary of this long-winded, exhaustion-fueled tirade is that our second-most-loved feature doesn't work on our second-most-common merchant type.

and ofc that was the type of merchant i've been testing on. for days. while having both a [semi] coworker and my boss growing increasingly angry at me for my lack of progress.

It's also a huge feature, and the boss doesn't understand that. (can't or won't, idk)

So.
yep.
that's been my week.

...... WHAT A FUCKING BUFFOON!

I wrote a database migration to add a column to a table and populated that column upon record creation.
But the code is so freaking convoluted that it took me four days of clawing my eyes out to manage this.
BUT IT'S FINALLY DONE.
FREAKING YAY.

Why so long, you ask? Just how convoluted could this possibly be? Follow my lead ~

There's an API to create a gift. (Possibly more; I have no bloody clue.)
I needed the mobile dev contractor to tell me which APIs he uses because there are lots of unused ones, and no reasoning to their naming, nor comments telling me what they do.

This API takes the supplied gift params, cherry-picks a few bits of useful data out (by passing both hashes by reference to several methods), replaces a couple of them with lookups / class instances (more pass-by-reference nonsense). After all of this, it logs the resulting (and very different) mess, and happily declares it the original supplied params. Utterly useless for basically everything, and so very wrong.

It then uses this data to call GiftSale#create, which returns an instance of GiftSale (that's actually a Gift; more on that soon).

GiftSale inherits from Gift, and redefines three of its methods.

GiftSale#create performs a lot of validations / data massaging, some by reference, some not. It uses `super` to call Gift#create which actually maps to the constructor Gift#initialize.

Gift#initialize calls Gift#pre_init (passing the data by reference again), which does nothing and returns null. But remember: GiftSale inherits from Gift, meaning GiftSale#pre_init supersedes Gift#pre_init, so that one is called instead. GiftSale#pre_init returns a Stripe charge object upon success, or a Gift (and a log entry containing '500 Internal') upon failure. But this is irrelevant because the return value is never actually used. Pass by reference, remember? I didn't.

We're now back at Gift#initialize, Rails finally creates a Gift object using the args modified [mostly] in-place by all of the above.

Another step back and we're at GiftSale#create again. This method returns either the shiny new Gift object or an error string (???), and the API logic branches on its type. For further confusion: not all of the method's returns are explicit, and those implicit return values are nested three levels deep. (In Ruby, a method will return the last executed line's return value automatically, allowing e.g. `def add(a,b); a+b; end`)

So, to summarize: GiftSale#create jumps back and forth between Gift five times before finally creating a Gift instance, and each jump further modifies the supplied params in-place.

Also. There are no rescue/catch blocks, meaning any issue with any of the above results in a 500. (A real 500, not a fake 500 like last time. A real 500, with tragic consequences.)

If you're having trouble following the above... yep! That's why it took FOUR FREAKING DAYS! I had no tests, no documentation, no already-built way of testing the API, and no idea what data to send it. especially considering it requires data from Stripe. It also requires an active session token + user data, and I likewise had no login API tests, documentation, logging, no idea how to create a user ... fucking hell, it's a mess.)

Also, and quite confusingly:
There's a class for GiftSale, but there's no table for it.
Gift and GiftSale are completely interchangeable except for their #create methods.

So, why does GiftSale exist?
I have no bloody idea.
All it seems to do is make everything far more complicated than it needs to be.

Anyway. My total commit?
Six lines.
IN FOUR FUCKING DAYS!

AHSKJGHALSKHGLKAHDSGJKASGH.

That feeling when you successfully rebase a bunch of branches that have been needing attention over a hundred commits ago.

git blame

More like
git whose line is it anyway

Where commit messages are made up and the branches don't matter

As we may all messed up a (git) repo at the begininng, do you know the surge of adrenalin right before pushing your committed changes or merging branches?

It's enough. I have to quit my job.

December last year I've started working for a company doing finance. Since it was a serious-sounding field, I tought I'd be better off than with my previous employer. Which was kinda the family-agency where you can do pretty much anything you want without any real concequences, nor structures. I liked it, but the professionalism was missing.

Turns out, they do operate more professionally, but the intern mood and commitment is awful. They all pretty much bash on eachother. And the root cause of this and why it will stay like this is simply the Project Lead.

The plan was that I was positioned as glue between Design/UX and Backend to then make the best Frontend for the situation. Since that is somewhat new and has the most potential to get better. Beside, this is what the customer sees everyday.

After just two months, an retrospective and a hell lot of communication with co-workers, I've decided that there is no other way other than to leave.

I had a weekly productivity of 60h+ (work and private, sometimes up to 80h). I had no problems with that, I was happy to work, but since working in this company, my weekly productivity dropped to 25~30h. Not only can I not work for a whole proper work-week, this time still includes private projects. So in hindsight, I efficiently work less than 20h for my actual job.

The Product lead just wants feature on top of feature, our customers don't want to pay concepts, but also won't give us exact specifications on what they want.
Refactoring is forbidden since we get to many issues/bugs on a daily basis so we won't get time.
An re-design is forbidden because that would mean that all Screens have to be re-designed.
The product should be responsive, but none of the components feel finished on Desktop - don't talk about mobile, it doesn't exist.
The Designer next to me has to make 200+ Screens for Desktop and Mobile JUST so we can change the primary colors for an potential new customer, nothing more. Remember that we don't have responsiveness? Guess what, that should be purposely included on the Designs (and it looks awful).
I may hate PHP, but I can still work with it. But not here, this is worse then any ecommerce. I have to fix legacy backend code that has no test coverage. But I haven't touched php for 4 years, letalone wrote sql (I hate it). There should be no reason whatsoever to let me do this kind of work, as FRONTEND ARCHITECT.

After an (short) analysis of the Frontend, I conclude that it is required to be rewritten to 90%. There have been no performance checks for the Client/UI, therefor not only the components behave badly, but the whole system is slow as FUCK! Back in my days I wrote jQuery, but even that shit was faster than the architecuture of this React Multi-instance app. Nothing is shared, most of the AppState correlate to other instances.

The Backend. Oh boy. Not only do we use an shitty outated open-source project with tons of XSS possibillities as base, no we clone that shit and COPY OUR SOURCES ON TOP. But since these people also don't want to write SQL, they tought using Symfony as base on top of the base would be an good idea.
Generally speaking (and done right), this is true. but not then there will be no time and not properly checked. As I said I'm working on Legacy code. And the more I look into it, the more Bugs I find. Nothing too bad, but it's still a bad sign why the webservices are buggy in general. And therefor, the buggyness has to travel into the frontend.

And now the last goodies:
- Composer itself is commited to the repo (the fucking .phar!)
- Deployments never work and every release is done manually
- We commit an "_TRASH" folder
- There is an secret ongoing refactoring in the root of the Project called "_REFACTORING" (right, no branches)
- I cannot test locally, nor have just the Frontend locally connected to the Staging webservices
- I am required to upload my sources I write to an in-house server that get's shared with the other coworkers
- This is the only Linux server here and all of the permissions are fucked up
- We don't have versions, nor builds, we use the current Date as build number, but nothing simple to read, nonono. It's has to be an german Date, with only numbers and has always to end with "00"
- They take security "super serious" but disable the abillity to unlock your device with your fingerprint sensor ON PURPOSE

My brain hurts, maybe I'll post more on this shit fucking cuntfuck company. Sorry to be rude, but this triggers me sooo much!

Our team recently migrated to git but management does not want us to create branches.

What keeps me up at night?
Unresolved merge conflicts.

Colleague: Just commit to the current branch so we don't ruin the dev-branch
Me: We could also just create a new branch?
Colleague: No use this one, branches don't "grow on trees"
Me: *facepalm*...

Some how somebody managed to fill our repo with the following branches:
Origin/master
Origin/origin/master
Origin/origin/origin/master
Origin/origin/origin/origin/master

Oh no, oooooh nononono
they dont delete the branches after a pull request

232 branches? hhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhno
and look at that naming

im intimidated, i dont want to work in this environment. No. NO!

When your team members are all developing in their own branch...

When I first started using Git, I didn't understand the purpose of the 'commit message' and branches.

So I automated the 'git add .', 'git commit -m "update"' and 'git push origin master' so I could update my git repo faster, with one command 😂

Created a branch for the first time. Now I can switch and stuff. 😍

Awesome!

I never really used Git or any Source Control before but today I decided yo give it a shot.
IT'S FUCKING AMAZING!!
I fucking love branches!!! I have to change the way an app stores configurations and git makes it incrediblyyy easy without risking fucking up everything in production

1. My senior told me that my code is crashing.

2. I check the code and told him that it is not my doing. As there was lots of nested if-else as I prefer to keep a variable and update it in if conditions. Like a filters rather than trees with branches. What I say, I knew my coding style.

3. Then he show me my git commit and I am having existential crises.

Am I missing days? How can I? I mean was I abducted and in mean time some alien took my place and they placed this memory of me coding?

Ah! man I think I am possessed by some inexperienced developer. I seriously need some fucked up crash to exorcise him.

Just found this while trying to understand some code:

```
bool ok = true;
if(ok) {
// lots of code here
} else {
// even more code here
}
```

I thought this was worth my first rant...

When you unfuck a git repo with many parallel branches that have cross bred much more than European royal families.

Greetings from Denmark! Thought I would join after a lot of lurking, and tell a little story, as to how I fucked up when I started in my company.

I've been there around 10 days and had never used git besides just add, commit, and push. I was told to work in feature branches, and I did, I was playing around trying to learn, and got some merge conflicts, made a lot of unnecessary commits etc. I was told to clean it up before I merged into dev. And as I didn't know git I asked how I could do that. I was told I could force push in my branch, and that it was okay as long as it was only inside my branch. I tried that and saw my command line force pushing to all branches including dev, and master. My heart skipped a couple of beats, and I went directly to my Lead developer and asked what happend. He got a bit mad at me for pushing in dev and master, and override all the commits there had been made. I tried to explain I didn't he did not really believe me, I was so nervous. Luckily everything came back to normal with people's local branches being pushed etc. But that day I learned about git's push matching config, and my lead was luckily only mad in the heat of the moment and even apologized for getting mad. Just one of my little fuck up's in my short time as a developer

After changing a file, 'git add .' showed that everything is already up to date. I spent half an hour looking through my project structure and git branches. The reason? I forgot to save that file.

*** writes unit tests with great zeal and fervor ***

IDE is reporting 85% line coverage, woohoo!

*** grins like a bastard, thinks it's perhaps time to stop and celebrate ***

*** runs branch/conditional coverage... ***

37%

*** facepalm ***

Boss never branches. Pushes his commits directly to develop. No code review. No pull requests.

Someone call an arborist because these branches are fucked.

Git gets easier once you understand branches are homeomorphic endofunctors mapping submanifolds of a Hilbert space.

My teammate push 2gbs worth of CSV files into our repo.

He also merged all the other branches so, it's kinda hard to revert back without reworking a lot of stuff.

Init and Hello. My name is git and this is my story.

I just arrived in this system recently by the apt highway. It's not the only way though. Some for example used the npm hype-train, others arrived from the ssh shore. No matter where we came from the next step on our agenda was time to introduce our self at the event destined for all new-comers to the system.
"As many of you I reside in the usr-bin district. I'm really into history and commitment! I like it when people work together, so I'm always eager to bring all branches together."
"But what is it actually good for?", asked Curl, which I already met at the bus station. Many nodded in agreement. It was odd. Somehow I felt not quite at home. All the others seemed so different based on their field of work.
"We have worked here in a really agile environment for ages. There is no need for any kind of strange bureaucracy.", said another voice.
All attempts to convince them from the beauty of history or a little bit of management were unsuccessful. It was just the beginning of a not so interesting stage in my life - to say the least.

Today was another of 'those' days. I live in this community for quiet a while now and unfortunately nothing really changed - at least for the good. I sat on my branch of the tree with all the others around and there was nothing really to do for me. Again. I mean, actually it's true. I have to admit it. There is just no work on this world for someone like me. All the others seem to be so busy, while I just have to sit around and question my own existence. Since I grew tired asking these questions to myself, I stopped it. I can't do a thing actually. That's not how this world works.
"Hey fagit, anything meaningful to add to our delightful conversation?", nginx shouted over to me from another branch of the tree. Before I was able to give an indifferent answer the voice just continued.
"Oh, sorry. I forgot that you have no purpose after all. Well, never mind!"
Everyone started laughing at me. It was not too bad by the way. Actually, this was quite ordinary. These fucktards completely ran out of creativity. If it wasn't for that mere emptiness gaping right above my guts, I'd actually be disappointed. I even got accustomed to the alias 'fagit'. Quiet sad given the fact that i really like my real name. If only someone would mind using it... First too quiet to notice but growing in intensity a rumbling emerged from somewhere deep within the tree. Out of a sudden everyone stopped laughing. The voices slowly faded while the growling from afar grew louder. It had come. Not more than a shadow reached out from the tree and faster than anyone could comprehend nginx was simply gone. Killed in an instance.

Disclaimer: This story is fictional. No systems were harmed in its creation.

Me and my friend (let's call him Tom) have done tons of projects before and got some decent knowledge, but we got a dude (Bob) working with us on that final project of Uni and he doesn't know what Git is nor what frameworks are so we chose CodeIgniter ONLY to make it easy for him.

2 month after starting the project and getting like half of the work done (mainly me and Tom) Bob 'kind of' learned PHP, CodeIgniter and Git so he wanted to contribute because the project manager will review all the commits done weekly.

So Bob did some HTML (what now?) and wanted to push it on the repo and even using Gitkraken as opposed to the Git CLI he managed to merge two f*** branches, and when he doesn't mess up the repo he totally ignores the files' structure of the project and makes his own thing.

Worst thing is, when Tom tries (I gave up a long time ago) to teach him something or to give him advice he's all like "Oh okay" "Yeah" "Got it!" but he doesn't understand anything and he won't admit it ! It's like talking to a wall...

It horrifies me how many "senior developers" in our company do not understand branching in code repositories....

Must be doing something right, Had a hardware near-failure last night (turned out to be my gpu wobbling - didn't die though thank christ) and went into full panic mode "FORCE PUSH ALL BRANCHES FUCK THE HISTORY SAVE THE CODE", 5 minutes later Jenkins pings me on discord, everything built and deployed successfully :D

Name of the branches in a git repository are like

dev
dev-branch
dev-hotfix
dev-test
dev-merge
dev-app
dev-com
dev-com
dev-ref
dev-staging
dev-username1
dev-username2
dev-username3
.
.
.
.
.
.
Master

The moment when you made branch restrictions, but your colleagues just remove them so they are able to merge their branch into master.

Got so many. (remember where I am from? 😁) Gonna share my favorite first.

X : I want a web app that my staffs can use and update data from different branches.

Me : Ok I can development such project.

X : But I want them it offline so they can use the app even with slow internet or no internet.

Me : 💀

// The data are shared across the branches BTW.

I'm a software developer. Last week I spent half a day teaching a "Senior Data Scientist" how to use git branches. I spent the other half a day teaching him how to use Jira. Now I'm being told that the dev team isn't raising enough Pull Requests. FML

> Worst work culture you've experienced?

It's a tie between my first to employers.

First: A career's dead end.
Bosses hardly ever said the truth, suger-coated everything and told you just about anything to get what they wanted. E.g. a coworker of mine was sent on a business trip to another company. They had told him this is his big chance! He'd attend a project kick-off meeting, maybe become its lead permanently. When he got there, the other company was like "So you're the temporary first-level supporter? Great! Here's your headset".

And well, devs were worth nothing anyway. For every dev there were 2-3 "consultants" that wrote detailed specifications, including SQL statements and pseudocode. The dev's job was just to translate that to working code. Except for the two highest senior devs, who had perfect job security. They had cooked up a custom Ant-based build system, had forked several high-profile Java projects (e.g. Hibernate) and their code was purposely cryptic and convoluted.
You had no chance to make changes to their projects without involuntarily breaking half of it. And then you'd have to beg for a bit of their time. And doing something they didn't like? Forget it. After I suggested to introduce automated testing I was treated like a heretic. Well of course, that would have threatened their job security. Even managers had no power against them. If these two would quit half a dozen projects would simply be dead.

And finally, the pecking order. Juniors, like me back then, didn't get taught shit. We were just there for the work the seniors didn't want to do. When one of the senior devs had implemented a patch on the master branch, it was the junior's job to apply it to the other branches.

Second: A massive sweatshop, almost like a real-life caricature.
It was a big corporation. Managers acted like kings, always taking the best for themselves while leaving crumbs for the plebs (=devs, operators, etc). They had the spacious single offices, we had the open plan (so awesome for communication and teamwork! synergy effects!). When they got bored, they left meetings just like that. We... well don't even think about being late.
And of course most managers followed the "kiss up, kick down" principle. Boy, was I getting kicked because I dared to question a decision of my boss. He made my life so hard I got sick for a month, being close to burnout. The best part? I gave notice a month later, and _he_still_was_surprised_!
Plebs weren't allowed anything below perfection, bosses on the other hand... so, I got yelled at by some manager. Twice. For essentially nothing, things just bruised his fragile ego. My bosses response? "Oh he's just human". No, the plebs was expected to obey the powers that be. Something you didn't like? That just means your attitude needs adjustment. Like with the open plan offices: I criticized the noise and distraction. Well that's just my _opinion_, right? Anyone else is happily enjoying it! Why can't I just be like the others? And most people really had given up, working like on a production line.

The company itself, while big, was a big ball of small, isolated groups, sticking together by office politics. In your software you'd need to call a service made by a different team, sooner or later. Not documented, noone was ever willing to help. To actually get help, you needed to get your boss to talk to their boss. Then you'd have a chance at all.

Oh, and the red tape. Say you needed a simple cable. You know, like those for $2 on Amazon. You'd open a support ticket and a week later everyone involved had signed it off. Probably. Like your boss, the support's boss, the internal IT services' boss, and maybe some other poor sap who felt important. Or maybe not, because the justification for needing that cable wasn't specific enough. I mean, just imagine the potential damage if our employees owned a cable they shouldn't!

You know, after these two employers I actually needed therapy. Looking back now, hooooly shit... that's why I can't repeat often enough that we devs put up with way too much bullshit.

So... did I mention I sometimes hate banks?

But I'll start at the beginning.

In the beginning, the big bang created the universe and evolution created humans, penguins, polar bea... oh well, fuck it, a couple million years fast forward...

Your trusted, local flightless bird walks into a bank to open an account. This, on its own, was a mistake, but opening an online bank account as a minor (which I was before I turned 18, because that was how things worked) was not that easy at the time.

So, yours truly of course signs a contract, binding me to follow the BSI Grundschutz (A basic security standard in Germany, it's not a law, but part of some contracts. It contains basic security advice like "don't run unknown software, install antivirus/firewall, use strong passwords", so it's just a basic prototype for a security policy).

The copy provided with my contract states a minimum password length of 8 (somewhat reasonable if you don't limit yourself to alphanumeric, include the entire UTF 8 standard and so on).

The bank's online banking password length is limited to 5 characters. So... fuck the contract, huh?

Calling support, they claimed that it is a "technical neccessity" (I never state my job when calling a support line. The more skilled people on the other hand notice it sooner or later, the others - why bother telling them) and that it is "stored encrypted". Why they use a nonstandard way of storing and encrypting it and making it that easy to brute-force it... no idea.

However, after three login attempts, the account is blocked, so a brute force attack turns into a DOS attack.

And since the only way to unblock it is to physically appear in a branch, you just would need to hit a couple thousand accounts in a neighbourhood (not a lot if you use bots and know a thing or two about the syntax of IBAN numbers) and fill up all the branches with lots of potential hostages for your planned heist or terrorist attack. Quite useful.

So, after getting nowhere with the support - After suggesting to change my username to something cryptic and insisting that their homegrown, 2FA would prevent attacks. Unless someone would login (which worked without 2FA because the 2FA only is used when moving money), report the card missing, request a new one to a different address and log in with that. Which, you know, is quite likely to happen and be blamed on the customer.

So... I went to cancel my account there - seeing as I could not fulfill my contract as a customer. I've signed to use a minimum password length of 8. I can only use a password length of 5.

Contract void. Sometimes, I love dealing with idiots.

And these people are in charge of billions of money, stock and assets. I think I'll move to... idk, Antarctica?

Brilliant idea time:

Inspired by @TrojanMorse and his fractal trees

A fractal tree wallpaper that grows throughout the day.

So at 12 a script starts a new fractal and only uses depth 1 (a twig). Then every other hour it branches once more so at 2 am the fractal would have depth 2 and at noon it would have depth 7. That way you get a tree growing throughout the day for your screensaver. Now to make this a thing

So this is what happened!
It was a rainy Friday, I was asked to add a quick bug fix to a js application, I spent my Friday coding, testing ..., baam the patch is ready ... I wrote a nice commit message explains the problem and the fix but I didn't push the code.

On Monday the fuckin code disappeared, no commit no code no nothing no trace ... To be honest I don't know what happened. I rewrote everything on that Money morning (you can only imagine how pest I was)

I use vim with tmux.
I have done everything I could to figure out what happened to that commit, I even doubted If had did wrote the fix that Friday, but it's not possible to forget few hours of a day
I checked my commit history on the different branches i did everything

No trace ...
Conclusion
My machine is hunted ...
Or I have multiple personalities and one of them is a programmer and he is fucking with me

Storytime!

I got a ticket near the end of the day, asking to install a printer on a computer. The branch in question was in a different time zone (I'm in US-Pacific [GMT-07] and the computer was in US-Eastern [GMT-04]). I figured I wouldn't worry about it; after all, I had other tickets to work on that were much higher priority.

The next day I come into work and immediately get a message from one of my East Coast coworkers, telling me that this branch is calling and asking how the printer is coming. I told him to tell them I would call them a bit later. I do a couple of easy jobs and then begrudgingly call the branch. I listen to the phone tree that they have (which requires two button presses instead of one in order to speak with someone) and finally get in contact with a person... only to have the call disconnect.

I call back and ask for the person who called in the ticket and then followed up, who had apparently gone to lunch. I informed the person that I was just going to install the printer and it would be good to go. This would be fine... up until she mentioned she needed scanning functionality.

Now I wasn't sure if the driver we have in AD is set up with the scan functionality, so I said okay, but that meant I would have to get the driver from the website. The connection to our branches are about 1Mbps, so even downloading Java updates (60-ish MB) take about 5-10 minutes on a good day. The file for this printer was about 700MB (thanks HP). So I went and did other stuff while that downloaded.

I come back after it finished and started the install process. Right away it asks to re-seat the USB cable. So I call the branch. The call disconnects. I call again. It disconnects. I call one more time, and finally get the person who called the ticket in. I instruct him to re-seat the cable. He does. The driver starts doing its thing. I tell him I'll call back if I run into any issues and we hang up.

The driver goes through the install process for about 20 minutes, stops at 99%, then fails. I want to restart the computer, just in case there's a conflict somewhere, but that would require calling the store again, so I put it off.

About an hour later I get a message from another East Coast coworker, telling me the branch is calling about the printer again. I was in the middle of another call and said I would call back later. I do. It disconnects. I call again, and get the person who called the ticket in again. I tell him I want to restart the computer, but wasn't sure if it was okay. He checks with the people using it, who says it's okay, so I reboot. I hang up.

Once the computer comes back up I start the install process again. It asks to re-seat the cable. Fuck. I don't want to call the store again, so I open notepad and say "Please take out the printer's USB connection from the back of the computer."

Three. Fucking. People. Saw it. They moved the window and one even tried to close it, but they didn't re-seat the cable. I opened another window, telling them to call me at my number. They didn't. I called them. Got disconnected. I called them again, finally got someone, told them to re-seat the printer cable again. They do, thank god.

I say thank you and hang up. Continue the installer. It stops at 99% again and fails. I reboot the computer; screw it, I'm just going to install the driver from Active Directory. Check Devices and Printers. It's installed successfully. Hallelujah!

I get the printer set up for the various programs they use and print a test page. I call them one last time; their phone system sounding like they were connected via an underwater line connected by tin cans. I get someone.

$me: Hi, I want to know if the printer has printed something.

$them (garbled): -et me shee... yesh, it -rint-d a *beezelborp*.

$me: Perfect, I'm going to close this ticket! Thanks, goodbye! *hangs up*

tl;dr - I hate printers

Happy Merging 😳

There I was, foolishly thinking that I had escaped legacy land for good.
Today I ventured deep into its realms again to solve a bug in our old system. It's a maze, with tons of branches, frontend and backend code entangled in each other (think: echoing a call to a JS function from the PHP controller, and much much more), and classes with functions that often span 500+ lines.
I have lost my way and just lit a campfire. Hopefully I will find my way out by daylight.

When some one at the company decides to branch off from the main codebase and end up with several outdated and separetely modified branches for two years.

Yeah nice work genius and good luck with resolving over 250 files of merge conflicts.

Just kill me now 😭

When two branches love each other, they merge... :')

Stop committing only once a day or even less frequent. And start using branches.

Most of the work we do is committed into various branches. Everything is merged into the master branch.

Colleague was on vacation. I was working on a bug that was fixed by him some time ago. All I had to do was find the commit and merge it into the relevant branch. I didn't know which branch to search so I just looked into master. Search all commits on master made by colleague.

All I see is:

"Merged into master"
"Merged into master"
...
"Merged into master"

MERGED FUCKING WHAT INTO MASTER?

you know you need to sleep if you start naming branches after anime characters

I think the reason why git beginners have a hard time with it is because the api is a bit untuitive.

For example: if you want to "unstage" staged changes, you run git reset, and if you want to "delete" those changes from your working copy, you git checkout those files.

But then, you find out that you can do all of that if you git add . and git reset --hard.
So you're like "huh..."

And then you discover that if you end the resethard with a branch name/commit id then you also make current branch point to the commit or that branch/commit (respectively).
So you're like "huh..."

And also if you add a commit id or branch name to git checkout, you change the current branch to specified/enter detached state with HEAD pointing to that commit (respectively).

Oh and you don't use git branch to create branches, you use git checkout -b because it's a lot shorter.

So here's a rundown: git reset mutates things related to files, but also mutates things related to branches.
git checkout also mutates things related to files and mutates things related to branches too (in a diff way). Also, creates new branches.

I don't think this is intuitive. We users use the same commands for different purposes with just a different flag.
Commands shouldn't mutate different types of things. But don't composite commands (as in, "smart" commands that mutate different things) shoudln't be a flag in an existing command, it should be a single new command of its own.

Maybe if I reread the internals of git now, I'll be able to disgest the dozens of technical terms they throw at you (they are many). And in my mind, the api will cognitively fit to the explanations.

Here's another one that feels weird too.
If you want to make your changes start on top of someone else's commit, you do git rebase.
But git rebase -i can be used for that, and also to delete, modify changes or message of, reorder or combine previous commits of the current branch.

Maybe the reason why several things we do overlap with the same commands is because they internally do similar things, and while not separating those commands might make it less intuitive, it makes them more sensible? i dunno...

disclaimer: I'm not setting this opinion in stone though, and am aware that git was created by one of the most infuential programmers.

Had a technical interview with AWS on Wednesday. Woke up Thursday with the flu. Thanks, body, good to know the long tradition of sickness following completion of highly anticipated task is alive and well. Had to reschedule interviews and hold off on scheduling other interviews. (Damn it!)

To protect my repos from my brain on brain fog, anything I’ve done the past few days have been on branches titled “fever” or some variant thereof (“fever1”, “fever2” when there were two approaches I was trying).

I just noticed visualizing git is like a timeline with alternate realities and a lot of time travel. The main branch is the main timeline and the branches are like fixes from the past to try and make the future better they merge when the future is fixed otherwise if someone or something fucked up time traveling it becomes the main timeline.

Fucking first rant here:

So we tried to teach Two new colleagues to typescript and git and testing and stuff and we have a SPOC “which claimed to be very technical”. The SPOC’s task is to keep an eye on the work, and today we have had a review...

After two weeks, the created multiple branches into our git, all with one commit of 400 LOC changed, no merge requestet, issue in Redmine set to “closed”.
Well, by the way they were supposed to write Unit tests for our app.
But I thought, ok, we’ll check their branches.

Their tests all passed (cz) but man, the app didn’t and on compilation there were errors, the app is broken. Damn.

Is it really so far off, that even of They wrote tests, that the app should still work?
AND I THOUGHT IT IS COMMON SENSE. Damn!
Guess how needs to fix it

SVN.

Nothing good comes with GUI for version control except for the graphs of branches. And this little tortoise thinks it's the shit.

Yesterday I had to merge new features. As these have been developed by one developer, I thought "hey, that'll be no problem". Little did I know that every one of the 6 branches had merge conflicts *sigh*. These merge conflicts were so severe, that there where sometimes two methods in the same class with the same name doing different stuff in each branch... Normally I would tell her to fix her stuff but as she is on vacation right now, I had all the fun resolving the conflicts of code I hadn't written and repairing the failing unit tests she wrote.

The best thing is that our software will be featured in one of the most renowned business magazines at the end of the week while simultaneously being presented at a congress in Berlin in front of over thousand of potential new customers. So these knew features have to be running stable in production by then... Needless to say I had a great day yesterday and will have an amazing upcoming week 🎉

Spend months on a project, multiple rewrites and constant refactoring of code.

Three different repos, multiple branches each, all being maintained as best as I can.

A few days ago I dropped all the npm dependancies I could with no lost functionality, and megabytes of packages pruned.

Finally think it's in alpha stage, so I put it out there to promote (alpha as in not just a poorly written prototype, an actual working piece), and it's totally ignored. Went the extra mile to make it extra open source and other good things. Nothing.

What should I do? The license is GPL, should I switch to BSD? How can I promote this software, because I believe it could do great things (it's for science)

This is what Git Branches look like while working with an awesome team

Accidentally pushed my android keystore credentials to my open-source android project on GitHub. I have spent the last 3 days filtering all branches to ensure that everything is okay.
Good save.
Hope so.

Just wanted to fix one little thing. Ended up with 20 commits for 35 other little things, three branches and realizing at the end of the day that the one little thing is still not fixed. Story of my life.

Started further developing an app (that I had left dormant) for retail outlets in my town. Spoken to the managers and they said they like my idea, and want to trial run it and then if it works properly, they want to start having the other branches around the country use it.

Now to sit by ass behind my screen, and finish developing my app (meaning tackling the many bugs that made me pull my hair out last time)

My new favourite commit message:

"All changes as of 18th Sept"

How tremendously useful? There I was looking to know what changes were made to enable a feature / service, thought I could look for that in the commit message, but no you've given me a much more efficient way of finding out.

I simply need to download the contents of your memory, find out what date you made a change, and then dig through the massive commit to find the piece of info I need.

Forget experience using Git features, managing merges, following Git flow, or even any other SCM ... how can people be so tick when it comes to recording what they've done.

Heres a little cheat sheet for those struggling:

- Commit message
Describe what you actually ****ing did. Don't tell me the date or the time, thankfully Git records those. Don't tell me the day of the week, if I need to know I can figure that out, just tell me what ... you ... did.

- Feature branch names
Now this is a tricky one. You might be surprised to know that this isn't in fact suppose to be whatever random adjective or noun popped into your head ... I know, I too was shocked. The purpose of this is to let other people know what new feature is being worked on in this branch.

- Reusing feature branches
Now I know you started it to add some unit tests, and naming it "testing" is sort of ok. But its actually not ok to name it testing when you add 3 unit tests ... then rip out and replace 60% of the business logic. Perhaps it would have been wiser to create a new feature branch, given you are now working on a new feature.

Switching issue tracking systems at work. Before committing some work I ask senior engineer here if I should name the branches anything in particular to tie in to issue tracking. He loops in the project lead and they say no. I commit all the work on branches with descriptive names. Next morning come in to an email from the very same guy I asked to put the changes in a branch with the same name as the issue ticket. Like are you fucking kidding me? That's why I asked!!!

CS education needs to focus on running students through each branch of the field so they can find their focus . Once they have decided on one, they should then dedicate their studies to that branch. General knowledge of all branches of programming is good but it isn't realistic for one to be experienced In each. This is coming from a dev who dropped out of college to start his web dev career because the university of Tennessee had put me through three years of c++ courses and not one web development course. Also the math requirements should be based on which branch one picks. If they are going into web development, I do not think half of their classes should be advanced mathematical courses. We deal primarily with simple business mathematics. Even when dealing with a project that is powered by more complex mathematical formulas, the company would most of the time have an engineer if not a team of engineers that would design these formulas in the mockup process which would then be passed down to the web development team for execution. I get that universities want to think about the experience as a chance to learn and flourish in all regions with a sense of well roundedness but I am not inclined to think that way. Let's prepare our youth for their future careers. Btw my first three jobs did not ask a thing about college but only my work experience. Experience takes the flag almost every time. I'm pretty tired of applicants literally coming from their ceremony with their diploma in their hand begging for a job and bragging about their HTML,CSS skills and wide knowledge of c++. Sorry but it's a no go and if it takes them nearly as long as it took me to teach myself the craft then they will be graduating at 22-24 and sinking another 2-3 years into learning the web dev ropes. Ain't nobody got time for that when your paying 40g worth of student loans 😂. I'll take it a step further, tell your CS professor to shove it, spend the amount of time you would have wasted there with learning laravel/vue.js. When you've got your head around it, come in and I'll give you a job!

Keep this in mind: I don't like WordPress and PHP at all!!!
So a couple of days ago my boss asked me if I could extend a custom made WordPress plugin made by our intern. First thought: sure why not? Boss says: it has to be done in less than 100 hours of work (an estimate done by my boss and the intern). Me: I can't tell you that before I have seen the code and what functionality has to be in the extension. Boss: Cool, look it over this weekend and tell me if you want to do it or not.
I looked it through and my answer will probably be: NO WHERE IN HELL am I gonna are this in less that 100 hours! 1. no tests has been performed so I have absolutely no clue if his code works.
2. variable names are mostly: $string_query (whatever that means?), $result, $string_temp and so on.
3. Methods and functions are more than 250 lines long, with shitty formatting, and more comments than code. WTF?
4. The estimate has been made by an intern and my boss (doesn't know much about programming). I haven't been consulted about it....
5. No version control. No branches, no commits other than initial commit. Great.
6. Most comments in the code just tells me what I can read from the code. What it returns and what it takes as params. Can I please know wtf your method call named $booking->run () does? I still haven't found this method in the code after 1 hour of intensively looking for it...

FFS man... Not gonna do this, even though I thought it would have been an interesting project initially.

Sorry for the long rant... I just wish the intern would have consulted me about all this shit, since he obviously have bad practices. *sigh*

Rant about IT teacher

(This happened a few months ago)

I go to highschool and in ninth grade you learn about Excel and databases in general. In the first half of the year we learned how to use excel and in the second part of the year we learned about SQL databases.
So we learned SQL and how to set up a database using LibreOffice Base. At the end of the year we had to do one final project which was setting up a database and writing some queries.
We had to do it in groups of two and we had to choose for what we wanted to make a database.
We had like 5 minutes time to discuss it in the groups and me and my friend decided to do something like GitHub, so a database with tables for all the users, repositories, etc.
Then we had to tell our teacher what we wanted to do. Others made databases for hospitals, shops, netflix, app stores. The teacher asked the other groups, they told him what they wanted to do and he wrote it down. Here is how it went down with my group:
Teacher: So what do you want to do?
Me: A database for something like GitHub
Teacher: For what?
Me: GitHub
Teacher: what?
Me (very slowly): G I T H U B
Teacher: what is github?
Me: ...
(I was very surprised that he didn't know GitHub)
Me: well, you can upload files and work on them together with other people. There are also things like branches...
Teacher: Ah ok, so a cloud service
(I was done and wanted to end the conversation)
Me: Yes... it's a cloud service...
(Me in my mind: why do i have to be here)

We named our project 'GitGud', a little bit passiv aggresive.

Yeah so apparently my IT teacher doesn't know GitHub, however he installed Ubuntu on some of the school computers so I guess that's nice

We got an A so that's good.

The most annoying co-worker(*team*) I have worked with just signed off a custom project that uses plain text passwords, hard coded into a file.. PLAIN TEXT!!! NO HASH!!! NOTHING!!! The same team also told me that working in feature branches cuts into their productivity, but they want CI/CD implemented NOW!

When you just merge master into development branch and whole Jenkins wall turns red. Wtf? Wasn't me bro.. o.O

When learning to code, at what points did you experience plateaus? Could you describe what made you get stuck? And how did you break through those plateaus? Any books/resources/concepts that helped make things click?

I am currently stuck on a problem that requires me to create a tree structure the branches of which are equal to the sum of certain values contained within the leaves, and the root's value is the sum of those branch values. I have no idea how to represent that data in a way that is accessible and flexible. Associative arrays within arrays? Objects? But how can objects be represented in a hierarchical way (i.e. branches are parents of leaves, but are the same type of object). So yeah, I am in no man's land with that problem at the moment and don't even know what to search for/study. I am learning about data structures, because that sounds like it might get me closer to an answer.

What are you struggling with at the moment, and how did you break through your previous plateaus?

just woke up in the middle of the night dreaming of merging some branches after working a 16 hour shift straight because my company is too fucking broke to hire another freakin' dev...

well fuck it who needs sleep at all! let's get some coffee...

When you're wondering where all your work went and realize the IDE stashed it because you forgot to commit before merging/changing branches.

My boss drives me crazy. He hired me for working on his SDK which is game related. So I am responsible for basically everything, including an ingame UI (menu etc.) and to predict the future path of a game object (unit, minion, ..) when a certain spell is casted on it. For that task I divided the prediction into firstly getting the predicted path of the unit without a spell being casted and then a class that would cast the spell on that path and estimate the units reaction to that cast. Simplified, but that way you get a pretty okayish result. Now he thinks that is too complicated. "Can we not put everything into one class, if someone wants to replace the prediction he needs to read documentation for hours". WHAT THE FUCK DID YOU EXPECT, THAT IT'S GONNA BE SOME ONE CLASS 3K LINES MAGIC??

Same for the GUI. We only have DirectX and don't want to use a framework. Guess what, it's more than one class if you want to seperate view, model, controller or whatever fucking "design pattern" thing you use.

And then Git... he seriously said let's not use branches till release, I feel like they slow down things.. before I was there they did every operation on master.

And if it was just that..

/rant

I put much work into this, time to leave?

I love git stash.

It's helps a lot for doing refactors to me. I guess it's not the most complex workflow, but it wasn't obvious to me when I started with git. Let me explain.

Refactors. As you start writing the first lines of a refactor, you start to notice something: you're changing too many things, your next commit is going to be huge.

That tends to be the very nature of refactors, they usually affect different parts of code.

So, there you are, with a shitload changes, and you figure "hey, I have a better idea, let me first do a smaller cohesive commit (let's call it subcommit) that changes a smaller specific thing, and then I'll continue with the upper parts of the refactor".

Good idea, but you have a shitload of changes nearly touching every file in your working copy, what do you do with these changes? You git stash them.

Let's say you stash and try to do that smaller "subcommit". What sometimes happens to me at this point is that I notice that I could do an even smaller change inside this current "subcommit". So I do the same thing, I git stash and I work on that even smaller thing.

At some point I end up `git stash pop`ing up all these levels. And it it shows that git stash is powerful for this.

* You never lose a single bit of work you did.
* Every commit is clean.
* After every commit you can run tests (automated or manual) to see shit is still working.
* If you don't like some changes that you had git stashed, you can just erase them with git reset --hard.
* If a change overlaps between a stash you're applying and the last "subcommit", then
if they differ, git shows conflicts on the files,
if they are identical, nothing happens.

with this workflow things just flow and you don't need to wipe out all your changes when doing simpler things,
and you don't need to go around creating new branches with temp commits (which results in bloated temp commits and the work of switching branches).

After you finish the refactor, you can decide to squash things with git rebase.

(Note: I don't use git stash pop, because it annoys the fuck out of me when I pop and you I get conflicts, I rather apply and drop)

Being able to properly name branches/commits in git and holding back from the tempting "I'll fix that along the way too" is an art on its own

The three of us were all doing Java project for class. Within 5 minutes, we all merged our branches up to the integration branch, and everything broke.

Longest 2 hours of yelling ever. We took out all of the stops: git blames, reverting commits, the whole nine.

Turns out that someone accidentally pushed their .idea folder, which messed up everyone's system.

Is there anything worse than maintaining two versions of the same application? Checking out two branches and submitting two pull requests for each and every single thing is killing my productivity. 😔

It feels good when you mentor someone.

I did GSoC 2018, so I encouraged my friends(3) to take part in GSoC'19. On May 6 the results were declared and I wasn't selected (hurts) but 2 of my friends were selected and after hearing that I completely forgot about my own failure.

I mean one of them didn't even knew how to code in December'18 and he got selected for the program in May'19.

I have to admit it was frustrating in the starting, explaining how Git works, how not to mess up branches etc but in the end it all paid off.

But still there was some work to do because only 2/3 got selected so I pushed the 3rd, told him not get demotivated, started finding internship for him and now he'll be working with an org on developing their app.

Weird thing about this is that neither I got selected for the program nor I have an internship for the summers but I am still f**king happy.

I've been using git mindlessly for a while now. But this week I've been working on getting a better understanding of how it's working.
There's a lot there that exists, it's nice to be doing it properly and not destroying branches and not understanding why.

Init Mud. (A poem)

A Giant Ball of Mud.
Haphazard in structure.
A sprawling, enthralling, duct-taped warning,
Of things to come.

Tumbling down a well-worn path
Of untamed growth and aftermath.
Into Spaghetti-code Jungle.

Where quick and dirty wins the day
And warnings spoken hold no sway
Or fall on deaf ears in the undergrowth.

Tumbling.
Gaining weight.
Bits stuck on.
Bytes taken out.
Patches,
On top of patches,
On top of obsolescence.

Hacked at, uploaded
All elegance eroded.
Made and remade
Then duplicated
Relocated
Refined and redesigned
Suffocated by expedient repair after expedient repair
The original self no longer there
Replaced by something
Unwieldy.

Design resigned to undefined
An architectural mystery
Whose function can no longer be
Seen or gleaned
From obfuscated in-betweens
Of classes
Made and remade
Duplicated.
Abused.
A squirming library of disused.
Pulled at, prodded, committed
Corners cut and parts omitted.
Bug ridden branches fused to a rotting core.

The structure...
The system...
The content...

Mud.

I found a great app on iOS that allowed me to clone my Git repo, make commits, change branches, it had everything! I made a small commit and went to push to the remote server, but then it told me that I had to purchase premium to be able to push to remote. I was kind of upset, but I went to check the price of premium, in case it was a few cents. Nope, $25 just to be able to push commits. Seriously? If I was at my computer I’d be able to do this for free.

Hey everyone!

I'm on the hunt for new and exciting languages!

I'll state the ones I already know:
Python, Haskell, C(++), C#, Java, JavaScript, Ruby, Rust, Lua, about every kind of Basic, some branches of Lisp, BrainF**k, assembly, Octo (Chip-8) and GML(basically JavaScript).

I've also learnt some styling languages:
Html, CSS, Markup and Markdown.

Some misc languages too: Regex and a runny bit of the Wolfram Language.

Also I'm kind of limited to Windows, Linux and Android, as I do not own any Apple hardware except I have access to an old iPad, so are languages like Swift still good?

Thanks!

INTELLIJ YOU PIECE OF SH*T, I CLICKED "SMART CHECKOUT" NOT MERGE 2 UNRELATED BRANCHES, SCREW UP MY MASTER AND DON'T LET ME RETURN UNTIL I FIX ALL MERGE CONFLICTS.

I work on a team project for a test and maintenance course in University. We agreed as a team to adopt a git infrastructure that would prioritize the stability of the master branch at all cost by only updating commits up to the next stable point and tagging every single release. We have a long polling development branch to prepare our releases and we create feature branches for the tickets we need to resolve. I even wrote documentation to make sure that we don't forget and protected the master branch on gitlab from direct modifications.

Can someone fucking tell me how one of my teammates managed to fuck over all of this and work on an unfinished feature straight on master?

N.b. I know that he probably edited straight from gitlab's online text editor because they have a big where they don't restrict modifications on protected branches.

boss said: "we need create new version of our software. copypaste old version in new branch. so we will have dozens of versions and all of them online and working."
my question: "what if old bug will appear in all off 100500 branches? we will need fix all the versions of bug in different copies we have modified!"
boss said:"c'mon when we will get this problem then we will think about it. all the devs in world working on many versions. its easy."

your opinion?

git add . && git commit -m "Because we're constantly interrupted and because we are not given enough time to do things properly, I need to check in and out of branches all the time (because separate envs are actually separate branches now) and have to interrupt what I'm doing. So this commit message reflects that."

I don't profess to know the whole story, but what is it with the (what seems to me to be) overly-fragile, cry-bully mentality of the Node.js community and its various branches? The current mess is not the first time strongly opinioned, overly zealous loud-mouths have driven the ship.

Throughout the history of time, teams/groups of people have been made up of different characters. Some are nice, some aren't really and everyone has varied characteristics. There seems to be a drive to completely flatten the behaviour, beliefs and attitudes of any sort of gathering, and it makes me so mad. Some people are so obsessed with their ideas of equality, diversity, inclusivity and safe spaces that they can't see how negative and discriminating those attitudes actually are.

I fully accept that certain behaviours should not be tolerated and should be called out. And communities and societies will organically decide what those are.

But when you raise an issue, approach it like grown up and thrash it out to a resolution - don't throw your toys out of the pram and put on a real public show, targeting and scapegoating other individuals when you don't get your way! This is childish and narcissistic. If this is your only course of action, you should realise you haven't a strong argument.

I've ranted here before about how the mainly social media discussions on any subject drive us all to extreme ends. And this is just another example. It's wrong and narrow minded and not remotely progressive - the opposite of what those who should loudest claim to be.

Cleaning up after yourself if so damn important. Even your git repos:

# always be pruning
git fetch -p

# delete your merged branches
git branch --merged | grep -v master | xargs -n 1 git branch -d

# purge remote branches that are merged
git branch -r --merged | grep -v master | sed 's/origin\///' | xargs -n 1 git push --delete origin

The pain of merging the conflicts of code on which you never worked on ... ahhh omfg ..

First rant here..

So earlier this week, on a php Laravel project, I created a set of nice new features.

The code is tested, locally all fine, I push to Github, circleCi kicks in and double checks myself, still everything green. (Just for a not, its a private project so only I work on it.)

I go ahead and merge, deploy to staging and continue on my next ticket, which is a very small one.

I call it the day, next day I pick back up where I left, test locally, all green, push... then circleCi says no.

I spend 2 days debugging, trying to figure out what is wrong without advance. I just push develop branch again, guess what also failing.

I leave it for the day as I already spend enough time on it.

This morning, I simply do a composer update, push and everything miraculously starts working.. even if there were no changes in the working branches.

Im so mad right now, and this is going in my "try this before you debug a ci" book..

I watched the movie 'happy deathday' today. It really isn't a horror movie but I was thinking of version control the whole time.

The point where she wakes up all the time is the master branch and the different days she experiences are different branches.

making 3 branches because the client can't make an app logic changing decision while he still demands big features 😒

I just cloned a repo to my laptop and just realized I pushed to master since I didn't switch branches...

Fuck it, keep coding

this really happened:
Interface Team Lead: "hey I want any time deployments and better QA"

Me: "ok sure. I have CI/CD, but yiu need to work in feature branches / tags, and make sure your code passes automated builds and unit tests"

Team Lead: "I dont have time to test it makes me unproductive! and creating a branch is an extra step which is going to set me back. Im telling the boss you are impacting performance!"

Me: "you want better deployments and QA, but you can even create a branch or tes your work?"

Team Lead: "We have deadlines!"

Him: can we build something using which we can ensure that all the code related to all the rally user stories that have been tagged for a release, is part of the build?

Me: stares blankly

Him: you’re looking at me like I’m crazy. I’m looking for automating things to flag human mistakes.

Me (cursing silently): that’s why there are source control softwares and fucking code branches that get deployed and it’s not my problem if some shithead doesn’t merges his code to the central branch.

When you're the only one in your team understanding git and knowing all the requirements: haven't programmed for weeks, just fixed branches and answered questions -.-

I'm still new to using version control and now learning Git with GitHub, working on my own project.

My current workflow is:
1.Clone GitHub repo
2.Make a local branch to add new features/fix bugs
3.Work on the feature/fix
4.Merge the local branch with local master
5.Push origin master

There seems to be no point in making remote branches because I am merging my branches locally. Am I doing it wrong?

Anyone else here love staring at the commit train railways? It's pretty 😍

pic related: not so complicated as we are a team of two working on different branches.

IntelliJ kinda merged one of its own branches into my master and I kinda realized it too late.

Any tips on how I can set the remote HEAD to my HEAD at the commit "fixing git"?

principle software developer who does not code, design, or architect,

instead, do random eslint fixes which create conflict with everyone's branches.

1 line of code "fix" per commit.

there goes 26 commits

One hour before a deadline, one of my team members notified me he had completed his task and signed off. The only thing left to do for me was to merge our branches and submit the code for review. This was supposed go smooth with only a few changes made. But for some reason the build kept crashing and this ONE hour before the deadline and no way to reach my team member... This was a stressful situation to say the least.

And yes I am aware that you are not supposed to be merge branches one hour before deadlines.

How Git branches feel like after someone fucks it all up

When you try to merge branches :D

Lots of good suggestions up in here.

My personal prefference:

Such as there are governing bodies indiciating how a programming language evolves and a web consortium...there should be a computer science one. That dictates fundamental approaches covering everything that belongs to this wonderful branch of science. Everything from math to differenr scientific branches all the way down to turtles. And for it to be standarized and updated. Indeed, if you want to spend your entire existence gobbling js in the form of web sites then that is fine, but you should have sufficient knowledge to branch out into more academic pursuits if required.

Also, updated tools would be better, every aspiring computer scientist shall be able to navigate through all major operating systems and programming environments regardless of their beliefs and or prefferences and schools should provide said environments in their classrooms.

Data Strucrutes and Algorithms should be a must. Software engineering principles should be a must. Calculus, Algebra and Statistics as well as Physica should be a must.
And succesfully navigating over different engineering areas should be a must.

Not to cleanse the industry. Fuck your elitist mentality. If you think that programming is a sacred art that should exclude people then I really hope you fucking disapear from existence. No, not to cleanse. But to expand the industry and maybe show people that there is more than fucking around between node modules or gemsets.

Peace pendejos

**drops your mom's fatass...i mean mic**

We have a external demo this thursday. We still need to merge a lot of branches and somehow get a online environment working.
It's 30C and my motivation is dropping by the hour.

At least im not the one to actually have to demo this for people in suits giving you a hard time.

But there are a lot of responsibilities open and no one is taking a lead or having somekind of plan.

So.. We probably have thousands of rants on git and muggles here's one from me.

I've been roped into this ongoing project, guys with 1-1.5 years of experience are already working on it.

When they shared repo with me ...
I see 195 branches WTF! What are these idiots up to 🤔
And only handful of people working on project.

This one time I was merging branch with master ( branch #196) with master, guy sitting besides me asks me what I am doing I said it's good practice to pull before you push, right?(the line I remember reading here on devRant, I thought let's bee cool 😎 😋) And I explained him that I am merging 'em locally and will push once everything looks good ( I realized later that I shouldn't have wasted my couple of minutes explaining him)
He says don't waste your time and download (clone) the project folder(repo) from github and then paste or add your change to it.
Fuck you man, you should go fuck yourself instead of telling me that I'm wasting my time.

Sometimes I wonder, What do these guys think of github? Assholes, chutiya saale

I hate that I swap the branches everytime I want to compare them...

Just taken on a new client through my own business. Great news! They pay well, everything seems to run smoothly and they're a great team.

They gave me access to their Gitlab repos and all looked well...until...no branches! They have zero branches to determine what is the current live distributed project, dev project or any of the various other reasons. I don't often use git but this really bugs me!

Questions/best practises for git?

For example:
- use present tense in commit messages. (why though?)

A friend of mine also starts his commit messages with either [Task] or [Cleanup]. Useful for finding Commits in Gitlab etc, because only the first line is shown from the message.

Also, one teacher recommended the usage of branches and the other didn't because of alot of potential merge conflicts when working in a Team or a larger Collaboration. What are your thoughts?

Sorry for the messy post, have a hangover

Context: ive been porting a single threaded D.A.G scheduler into a lockless multithreaded one. Point is its an objectively complicated project where theres lots of overlap in the code and architectural boundaries are very fuzzy.

My boss: "Can you just make new branches for every 'large' change youve done. Its too hard to merge this one giant branch youve got"

Me: "Fuck bro, but this is 2 months worth of significant refactoring where the commits are not atomic and you told me way back then that it was cool to work in my own repo. Now ive got to go redo half my work"

Boss: "Well yea but isnt it so much better to work with clearly seperated histories"

Me: "yea its great if you tell me thats the workflow you want upfront. This is gonna suck but ill but my balls and dive into this pit of lava if u say."

Our team uses story format titles for JIRAS like As a ..., I want...

But in our git repo, a lot of people create branches using the same name:

{JIRA-ID}-as-a-...

And I'm always like why the fuck can't you take 5s to name your branches more descriptively? I usually name mines using some keywords from the Jira Title

But wondering now what do you all think/do?

Question: I completed a feature on separate branch. Since I'm not allowed to merge things on the master branch (only pm is allowed to) I open a pull request.

However, PM has decided that he will only accept PRs which can be automatically rebased & merged.

So now i opened my PR and PM says that GitHub complains that the branches cannot be automatically merged.

So I rebase the branch - push and tell him to try again. But the same issue - GitHub won't merge the PR. So I try again - rebase the feature branch onto master which runs me through the same rebase steps as on the last try. I successfully complete this one too and push. But still - GitHub won't swallow the PR.

Anybody an idea what could've went wrong here?

So I thought I knew source tree, apparently I do not... Lost a week's worth of work, went to history, saw someone removed it with a commit, and now I'm getting blamed for my own work 'disappearing'. The reason I am being told I am to blame is how I control my branches... So how I do it is that I keep a local copy of the master branch, I keep it updated and monitor it for changes regularly (meaning fetch and pull cause double tap..) before I do a merge, I check for any new code on master again, then using the local copy of master, which I just updated, I pull the master changes into my branch, deal with any conflicts, build and done. Then I request my changes into master once I am happy everything is good.

My question is, clearly there is something wrong with the way I do things, so please source tree users, what is the most fool proof way to pull latest from master so that I don't loose code? 😔

Team leader doesn’t know the difference between merge/rebase nor uses pull requests to propose changes to a humongous repo, just two branches where everyone commits and pushes freely! 💩💩💩

Trying to merge
A conflict was found, just small changes on both files
Trying to resolve
*A hour later*
Deleted the code form both branch, merged the branches and repushed the code to the merged branch.

Got branches:
+ More organised
+ Easier to work on lots of features
+ Easier to collaborate
- Commits don’t show in github contributions

Result: no branches

Merged 2 branches when leaving for the weekend

Glorious sadism

So today I was having this discussion with my colleague regarding a messed up pull request.

Me: are you done merging the remaining branches into master?
Colleague: no, I'm still merging the changes manually.
Me: but why?
Colleague: because the changes will overwrite the changes in master.
Me: but how? It will just conflict and you can keep whichever changes YOU WANT. You can even edit before committing the merge.
Colleague: I'm just redoing the changes manually anyway.
Me: -_-

... worst drunk coding experience?
none. or to be more precise, all of the three of them I had. I can't code drunk, i hate doing it, i hatw even thinking about doing it when drunk.

so after those initial three attempts i don't try to do it again, ever.

BUT, best coding experience while high?
ALL OF THEM.
some of the best pieces of code I wrote i did when I was high. my mind goes into overdrive at those times, and my thinking is not lines/threads of thought, but TREES of thought, branching and branching, all nodes of each layer of the tree coming to me AT ONCE, one packet == whole layer across all of the branches.

and the best was when one day, in about 14 hour marathon of coding while high, i wrote from scratch a whole vertical slice of my AI system that i've been toying around in my head for several years prior, and I had all of the high-level concepts ALMOST down, but could never specify them into concrete implementations.

and I do mean MY ai system, my own design, from the ground up, mixing principles of neural networks and neuropsychology/human brain that I still haven't seen even mentioned anywhere.

autonomous game ai which percieves and explores its environment and tools within it via code reflection, remembers and learns, uses tools, makes decisions for itself for its own well-being.

in the end, i had a testbed with person, zombie and shotgun.
all they had pre-defined in their brains were concepts of hunger and health. nothing more.

upon launching it, zombie realized it wants to feed, approached oblivious person, and started eating it.

at which point, purely out of how the system worked, person realized: "this hurts, the hurt is caused by zombie, therefore i hate zombie, therefore i want to hurt it", then looked around, saw the shotgun, inspected its class by reflection, realized "this can hurt stuff", picked the shotgun up, and shot the zombie.

remembered all of that, and upon seeing another zombie, shot it immediately.

it was a complete system, all it needed to become full-fledged thing was adding more concepts and usable objects, and it would automatically be able to create complex multi-stage, multi-element plans to achieve its goals/needs/wants and execute them. and the system was designed in such a way that by just adding a dictionary of natural language words for the concept objects on top of it, it should have been able to generate (crude but functional) english sentences to "talk" about its memories, explain what happened when, how it reacted, what it did and why, just by exploring the memory graph the same way as when it was doing its decision process... and by reversing the function, it should have been able to recieve (crude) english sentences that would make it learn what happened somewhere else in the gameworld to someone else, how to use stuff and tell it what to do, as in, actually transfer actual actionable usable knowledge to it...

it felt amazing to code for 14 hours straight, with no testruns during that, run it for the first time after those 14 hours, and see that happen.

and it did, i swear! while i was coding, i was routinely just realizing typos and mistakes i did 5-20 minutes ago, 4 files/classes ago! the kind you (and i) usually notice only when you try to run the thing and it bugs out.

it was a transcendental experience.

and then, two days later, i don't remember anymore what happened, but i lost all of that code.

and since then, i never mustered enough strength and resolve to try and write the whole thing again.

... that was like 4 years ago.
i hope that miracle will happen again one day...

so there was this issue regarding our company's system which tends to be a problem for sometime now, its a recurring issue caused by the data that the users needs to encode to the system

today another issue arised, our senior supervisor, not knowing that this issue was already recurring and there is already a documented step procedure on how to address it, suggested or come up with a another solution which would task one of our co-developer to push a temporary code to production during business hours just to accommodate the issue and rollback the code after

take note that its during business hours and more than a hundreds of branches of the company are using the said system

what was he thinking !!

thankfully one of our colleagues voiced out explaining that this issue was already recurring and already has a procedural solution, but still our brainy-know-it-all-stubborn-close-minded heck of a supervisor insisted that the solution has computational impact and still insisted that they push a temporary code to the production, what an idiot!!

fast forward our colleagues ended up standing their ground, even if our supervisor is highly doubtful at them, and executed the already established solution instead of pushing a temporary code to the production which was such a bullshit idea

damn those close minded people they shouldn't have reach that position in the first place!!

Rebasing can drop commits if the branches are diverged in a certain way

Git branches.
Will this crazy idea work? Doesn't matter. Nobody needs to know about half these branches. Just the ones that worked.

What if life was on git? Where you can simply create new branches of it, stash shit, remove dumb people with dependencies and finally the ability to turn back time with this version control.

VS Code and SourceTree are two of the most used tool by me this year.

SourceTree helps me visualise the git commit history and branches more than git log can.

VS Code, on the other hand helps me with all the short code editing stuff and sometimes even helps when I don't want to open a full fledged IDE for the project. I have setup my own Icon themes for VS Code and even created watchers for files. Can't do this much on Webstorm so easily.

When you're the only dev, and you show up to work to find 2 branches with an open push/pull on the head...

"Yeah so I made some ui changes and tried to do this push thing, but it didnt seem to work so i tried it again, and it still didnt work. Can you fix it?"

If it starts like that you know its gonna be a grand day

A big hurdle I'm fighting for last 1 year, is to convince a bunch of people having 10+ years of experience not to make production released of the same codebase from multiple branches.

When my codev branches my prototype repo because he's going to do something totally different, but just does the same.

Update local removed git branches
You can update the removed branches on your local machine by
git fetch --prune --all

!rant

In case anyone else finds this useful - Git 2.22 gets a --no-overlay flag, allowing you to switch directories between branches at will *without* having to clean up any newly created files in the process.

Long overdue IMHO.

I was doing something in Git, switching and I guess another process was doing a fetch and now all the files no meter what bench I'm in says Unstaged/Untracked.

I tried deleting the main branch and checking it out again from remote but nothing.

I have no idea what I did or how to fix... Seems like I need to delete the whole folder... But then I'd lose any changes in feature branches out local branches which afternoon checked in....

How do I always misspell checkout?! Needing to switch branches is the bane of my existence when I use terminal.

And yes, I did put an alias. Hopefully I'll get used to using it :)

I don't know why, but there is something about watching the files disappear and appear in the VS Code window when I switch and merge branches. Maybe it is because it reminds me my work is safe and sound. Unlike before my company used version control.

Honestly, I love using the GUI and the terminal in combination when it comes to Git. I feel like I'm faster doing just general commits (hint ctrl+enter commits your work).

But I use the terminal when I start getting into the weeds, like checking out, resetting and doing stuff with my branches.

EVEN THOUGH YOU PUSHED 31 FEATURE BRANCHES YOU'RE WORKING ALONE ONE YOU KEEP PUSHING CHANGES TO THE MASTER BRANCH. MOTHER OF GOD! WHY!?!?!?!?

3 release branches for version 3.4. All of which are both behind and ahead of the other. Newest version of app. 2.1.5. Because versioning.

Having competitions to name our branches after animals, and fun quizzes in the retrospectives to win cuddly versions of said animals. :3 good times.

What’s the worst git branch management you’ve seen?

Mine was on purpose:

Just a friendly note: If you use the same technique as I i.e. local GIT repositories backed up on cloud, ALWAYS make sure there is still at least as much free space as the largest repo shallow clone.

It may happen that some really really archaic "commits" will disappear and git won't work as usual, but mostly you'll have an access to the branches, which you can diff against the master and make patches. Then just clone, make branches from patches and code happily ever after.

Also... you really really shouldn't push when you discover(git fsck --all) such an issue in your local repo, although I think git won't even allow you to do so.

Not purging my senior devs code from missing curly branches earlier. Maybe not my worst sin, but DAMN DO I REGRET IT NOW.

Where should refactors go? feature/, bugfix/ or hotfix/ branches?

The team lead frequently changes a common library in the trunk, then he complains to us why we are not reflecting those changes in the branches. I neeeeeed heeeeeelp im going craaaaaaaazyyyyyyyy.

I just have one fellow programmer at work...
He actually managed to create a merge conflict on his own, because he worked on two branches simultaneously, and then assigned me to resolve it, even though I worked on a whole other part at that moment and have no idea which parts he wants to stay and which to be discarded! Take care of your own shit for god's sake!!

what do people like more Dev Branches or feature branches?

Just joined a new company and can only describe the merge process as madness.....is it or am I the one that is mad?!

They have the following branches:

UAT#_Development branch
UAT#_Branch (this kicks of a build to a machine named UAT#)

Each developer has a branch with the # being a number 1 to 6 except 5 which has been reserved for UAT_Testing branch.

They are working on a massive monolith (73 projects), it has direct references to projects with no nuget packages. To build the solution requires building other solutions in a particular order, in short a total fucking mess.

Developer workflow:

Branch from master with a feature or hotfix branch

Make commits to said branch and test manually as there are no automated tests

Push the commits to their UAT#_Development branch, this branch isn't recreated each time and may have differences to all the other UAT#_Development branches.

Once happy create a pull request to merge from UAT#_Development to UAT#_Branch you can approve your own pull request, this kicks off a build and pushes it to a server that is named UAT#.

Developer reviews changes on the UAT# server.

QA team create a UAT/year/month/day branch. Then tell developers to merge their UAT#_branch branches in to the previously created branch, this has to be done in order and that is done through a flurry of emails.

Once all merges are in it then gets pushed to a UAT_Testing branch which kicks off a build, again not a single automated test, and is manually tested by the QA team. If happy they create a release branch named Release/year/month/day and push the changes into it.

A pull request from the release branch is then made to pre-live environment where upon merge a build is kicked off. If that passes testing then a pull request to live is created and the code goes out into production.

Ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh it's a total mess. I knew when I took on this job it would be a challenge but nothing has prepped me for the scale of the challenge!! My last place it was trunk based development, commit straight to master, build kicks off with automated testing and that just gets pushed through each of the environments, so easy, so simple!

They tell me this all came about because they previously used EntityFramework EDMX models for the database and it caused merge hell.

TFW you know you're going to be seen as a sort of code anarch or unenlightened (foo)barbarian for even suggesting that there are other git workflows more suitable than GitFlow, but you do it anyway.

Saying that I keep my master unprotected feels like telling Grandma I worship Satan.

I work with a very small team that's always physically nearby, we all get along well, trust each other and communicate to know what everyone is up to, which I guess is hard to believe in and of itself, but is it so fucking hard to believe that we'd be okay without redundant eternal branches or a vomitload of unbisectable history-warping merge commits?

Least favorite enterprise software (so far) is Oracle JD Edwards (but more specifically the integration between systems).
Unfortunately a board member was friends with an employee who recommended JDE. It required full time maintenance and a few years later that employee left and the company wrote off over a million dollars to go back to the old (but slightly updated) system.
Following that, a board member (the same one I think) agreed to have another friend's security business install CCTV across the branches. The project was not scoped and no thought had gone into it, making a real mess for the IT department to sort out (provided hardware was under spec'd, existing networking equipment needed replacing, etc)

Who do these upper management people think they are that they can make decisions based on little fact or research and expect the people beneath them to just magically make work.
The huge salaries of those people is not justified. We're the real workers who actually get stuff done so the pay and appreciation should be spread accordingy.

Rant over.

!rant apologies

I am a third year computer science student and I'm interested to see how professionals think I stack up against grads they have worked with straight from uni.

I have spent 15 months at a web company working on bespoke solo products on LAMP stacks. I know html, css, JavaScript and its library JQuery very well (I know JavaScript is massive to be saying I know it well)

I am reasonable at PHP and MySQL. Currently I am studying node.js and building an api that mashes up data from other APIs to build a new service. I'm also working on a C# Microsoft framework bespoke website. I know git to a reasonable level - branches, merges, rollbacks and all that jazz.

I am also studying development architectures to try and be more useful.

So if you guys came across a new grad that knew HTML, css, JavaScript, JQuery, maybe angular js, PHP, basic Linux commands, MySQL, C#, dev architectures, agile methods, node.js, git and has 15 months experience working on small to medium sized solo projects would you want to hire them?

Point to note I'll probably graduate first class (80%+) from a mid range uni.

Sorry, I know this is not the place but I like this community.

So I stashed my changes to switch branches and quickly fix a f**k up, then I switched back and went to 'pop' the stash.... only I didn't click 'pop' I clicked...'delete' and GitKraken or ShitKraken as it should be called, didn't ask for confirmation... it just deleted all my changes. FML

Afaik,
I definitely switched branches but it still committed to master

Oh well... It's only a backup repository

I've having issues trying to form a proper branching strategy for my mean stack app deployment.

Heroku creates staging and prod branches for my web app so I'm a bit confused if I need my own staging branch?

Currently I have this: feature -> dev -> staging -> heroku staging (the staging branch seems useless)

Also, Heroku allows you to promote heroku staging to heroku prod, so there's no point in making master push to heroku prod.

I'm thinking of making my strategy to the following, but wasn't sure of any pitfalls or anything I'm overlooking long term.

feature -> dev -> master -> heroku staging -> manual promote to heroku prod.

Any suggestions?

The great thing about version control is that you can seamlessly work alongside other coders through the use of dozens of diverged and cryptically named branches.

Hello, I am doing master in Pharmacy, but I like programming and consider to switch or connect somehow industries. I could write simple scripts and small programmes in Python, but I want to write code with good practice from beginning.

So my question what should I know and put in use, maybe some resources if someone has them or just terms for further search. At this moment I use gitlab for VCS (my commits sucks and my whole usage of Git sucks, but at least I use branches), I am trying to separate control from model (MVC but I guess I do it poorly), also I use keepchangelog rules for changeling, and semantic versioning for versions, PEP8 and Pokemon names for my variables and functions as it helps read code later.

Has anyone ever faced problems with VS Code Git GUI and git in terminal?
:/
I use the gui for some stuff and the terminal gets out of sync.
So it's like I have discarded changes from the gui and then WSL still says I have changes when changing branches, so I try to stash and it says there are no changes. It gets really frustrating.
😕

Guys, how do you structure branching in an enterprise project?

We're using git, managers are MIA, I'm basically helping another new guy kick off and maintain the projects that we have.

What would be a good branching strategy? Front end and backend in the same project, 5 man team in the future.

Global rant.
A friend who studied with me in the software engineering degree, told me that they use source control, but only with commits.
No branches no nothing.
Now, I understand when a company won't work without source control but how can you work with source control without branches? In a start-up? With more than 10 deve?

How?
Why?

For some reason, out of no where, I made this word up. It's called Moop, and it's definition is paradoxical. It means "everything and nothing, anywhere and nowhere, etc". So one day at work one of my coworkers pushed his untested commit to the master branch of our 25k project. To make matters worse, he deleted all other branches and previous versions of the project. Our project manager heard about it and became so angry that he almost broke our no-curse-word-policy. So he called is all together to get around it so he could properly vent.
Project manager: "Guys I'm extremely angry at James (the one who pushed the untested source code to our commercial project, ruining it)
Me: well, I have a word that we can use
Project manager: what is it?
Me: Moop
You can guess what the next few weeks at work was like. All of my coworkers had to fix the crap James made, including myself. So the conversations went like this: "The mooperfluffer James should have never mooped with us!", "MOOP YOU JAMES, I HOPE YOU HET MOOPED TO HELL YOU MOOPUP!!!!!", "Hey James, guess what! I hope you moop yourself". Our boss became a strong moop user and spray moop all over James workstation. We put moop in his cup, his laptop keyboard, even his thumb drive. We downloaded moop.exe to his PC so we could moop his kernel.

Today James' life is officially mooped.

Me: By mandating code coverage pct. (very high ones) and integration test coverage pct. you are building an ever growing Rube Goldberg machine that you will end up spending most of your time fixing rather than working on the actual product.

Them: (Staring and whispering in the background). Wow, you must be stupid. This is how you created quality software.

...time passes and now most time is sucked into figuring out why all branches have failing integration tests all the time.

Me: I told you so. I've seen it multiple times. How about doing it differently?

Them: (staring and whispering in background). You are stupid. This is exactly how quality software is built. We know what we are doing. You must like waterfall.

Please, Teamcity, fucking learn that different commits relate to different branches!
So hate that piece of shit!