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?

I just wanna show you guys our branches.

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.

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

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.

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

Me: So i've cloned the iOS project, i've run carthage, but it won't build.. Have I done something wrong?

Devs: Oh read this doc on github, we do loads of custom stuff. The depenedncy manager can't do it all by itself. You need to run `./scripts/boostrap.sh`

Me (another day): I've switched branches and i'm getting all these errors. Any ideas?

Devs: Ah this happens when someone modifies xyz. Read this pinned slack message. Run `./scripts/bootstrap.sh` again.

Me (another day): I've switched branches again, getting different errors, re-running boostrap didn't fix it.

Devs: Ah yeah, this happens when someone modifies abc. You need to run `./scripts/nuke.sh` and then boostrap when this happens.

Me (another day): Guys When I try to run the prod app its not building any ideas?

Devs: Ah yes have a look at this confluence link. You need to run `./scripts/setup_debug_release.sh`, then nuke, then boostrap and you'll be good.

Me: .... ok

Devs: Oh btw very important! do not commit any changes from `./scripts/setup_debug_release.sh`. It will break everything!

Me: ... no i'm sorry we have a much bigger problem than that. We need to talk ... like right now

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.

other dev at work: "why cant i switch branch of my SVN repo like Git"
Me: "Cuz it uses different approach, different branches are at different locations......."
Him: "but how can i use it like Git"
Me: "you cant"
Him: "but why"
Me: "Get away from me before i throw something heavy at you"

So I have been merging loads of branches lately for our final release and now it’s affecting my dreams.

I sleep with two pillows, judge me I don’t care. One night I woke up screaming “Why won’t this merge?”

Everyone woke up and it took sometime for me to come to my senses. When my family switched on the light I saw one of my pillows partially shoved into my other pillow’s case.

I need a vacation.

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.

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

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

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.

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!

What keeps me up at night?
Unresolved merge conflicts.

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?

TFW your client's git policies are so draconian that the dev teams use "develop" as trunk, and completely ignore the release process.

I wrote up 50 pages of git standards, documentation and procedure for a client. Bad indian director 9000 decides the admin (also Indian) who specializes in Clearcase and has no git or development experience is more qualified to decide and let's him set the policy.

FF to today:

- documentation, mostly contradictory, is copy pasted from the atlassian wiki
- source tree is the standard
- no force pushing of any branches, including work branches
- no ff-merge
- no rebasing allowed
- no ssh, because he couldn't figure it out...errr it's "insecure"
- all repos have random abbreviated names that are unintelligible
- gitflow, but with pull requests and no trust
- only project managers can delete a branch
- long lived feature branches
- only projects managers can conduct code reviews
- hotfixes must be based off develop
- hotfixes must go in the normal release cycle
- releases involve creating a ticket to have an admin create a release branch from your branch, creating a second ticket to stage the PR, a third ticket to review the PR (because only admins can approve release PRs), and a fourth ticket to merge it in
- rollbacks require director signoff
- at the end of each project the repo must be handed to the admin on a burned CD for "archiving"

And so no one actually uses the official release process, and just does releases out of dev. If you're wondering if IBM sucks, the answer is more than you can possibly imagine.

git blame

More like
git whose line is it anyway

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

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

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!

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

Awesome!

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 😂

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

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...

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.

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

"WTH! Get the fuck out of here, bitch!!".

I started a new job today (remote) and my first task was to improve product sign-up process, basically the UX is shit and the backend is even worse, never felt so bad looking at terrible software design my entire life and career. My first assignment was to introduce some sanity. (Mr. Supervisor's exact words)

Anyway, I report directly to upper management but need to get onboarded by current technology expert who's highly skilled at writing shitty code and is also stupid, literally.

It took the whole day to get him to grant access to the private repo in order to start working but that's not the story.

So, I'm seated, demoralised about the structure of software I have to work on and here I was refreshing localhost:7878 consistently and was consistently getting the message:
"WTH! Get the fuck out of here, bitch!!".

So, this same codebase I have is suppose to be the exact same one that's powering the app in production. I was furious and confused. Is stupid calling me a bitch already??? He wants to fuck??? What the hell!!!

I called him and turns out, I was suppose to switch branches. The branch I had was suppose to show that message intentionally (??!???!???) (His words exactly), I couldn't even muster the words "Why" completely before he hung up.

So basically, I got onboarded today. Quite successfully, I must add, because I know exactly the battlesuit I have to wear to my new remote job going forward!

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

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 ***

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

I spent four hours just getting my dev environment working again today.

Whenever I switch branches on this project, I keep to run a script that does migrations, seed data, test db setup, static test info, etc. etc. etc. It takes 12-15 minutes to run.

Today, that script failed.

Apparently one of its steps requires running some of the project's code to produce valid objects. Makes sense. However, my ticket involves breaking a crapton of models (removing accessors) which I've already done, and then patching the behavior, which I haven't. Which means a lot of things are currently broken. Makes sense why the script fails.

However, I can't run the script on a different branch and then switch back because that simply doesn't work (for reasons), so I needed to find some workaround. I eventually did, but every attempt cost me 12 minutes.

Today was not fun, and certainly not productive.

I wonder when they're going to fire me 😅

!rant
!!pride

I tried finding a gem that would give me a nice, simple diff between two hashes, and also report any missing keys between them. (In an effort to reduce the ridiculous number of update api calls sent out at work.)

I found a few gems that give way too complicated diffs, and they're all several hundred lines long. One of them even writes the diff out in freaking html with colors and everything. it's crazy. Several of the simpler ones don't even support nesting, and another only diffs strings. I found a few possibly-okay choices, but their output is crazy long, and they are none too short, either.

Also, only a few of them support missing keys (since hashes in Ruby return `nil` by default for non-defined keys), which would lead to false negatives.

So... I wrote my own.
It supports diffing anything with anything else, and recurses into anything enumerable. It also supports missing keys/indexes, mixed n-level nesting, missing branches, nil vs "nil" with obvious output, comparing mixed types, empty objects, etc. Returns a simple [a,b] diff array for simple objects, or for nested objects: a flat hash with full paths (like "[key][subkey][12][sub-subkey]") as top-level keys and the diff arrays as values. Tiny output. Took 36 lines and a little over an hour.

I'm pretty happy with myself. 😁

Someone call an arborist because these branches are fucked.

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

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.

Finished my project early today. I assumed it would take another day or two since it's primarily research and I had no idea how to progress, but I caught a break and finished it early. I also finished another surprise ticket! yay! I had the rest of the day to myself!

... had!

But then I noticed I had been working on the wrong branch. Fuck. Moving my work over was tedious, as was the cleanup. I kicked myself for good measure. Also, every time I switch branches, I need to run a bloody slow script that runs all the migrations, data tasks, backfills, etc. for the branch. It takes 12-18 minutes. There's a faster version, but it usually breaks things.

Turns out the branch I was supposed to be working on wasn't up to date with master. So I merged that in, leading to....

merge conflicts. Because of course there are conflicts. To make matters worse, I had (and have) no idea which changes were correct because idfk what those 248 new commits are doing. So I guessed at them, ran the script, and (after more waiting) ran a few related specs. Yet more waiting. Sense a pattern here? Eventually they finished, and all the specs passed. H'ray. So I committed the changes, and told Jenkins to kick off a full spec suite, which takes 45+ minutes.

La de da, I go back to cleaning up the previous ticket, pushing reversion commits, etc. Later, I notice the ticket number, look at the branch number I've been working on.... and. Fuuuck. I realize I had put everything on the wrong freaking branch AGAIN. I'm such an idiot. Cue more cleanup, more reversions, running the bloody script again and again. More wasted time, more kicking. ugh.

All of this took well over three hours. So instead of finishing at a leisurely 5:00 like a normal person, I finally stopped around 9pm. and I won't know the Jenkins spec results until morning.

A nice early day?
I should know better.

Got pretty peeved with EU and my own bank today.

My bank was loudly advertising how "progressive" they were by having an Open API!

Well, it just so happened I got an inkling to write me a small app that would make statistics of the payments going in and out of my account, without relying on anything third-party. It should be possible, right? Right?

Wrong...

The bank's "Open API" can be used to fetch the locations of all the physical locations of the bank branches and ATMs, so, completely useless for me.

The API I was after was one apparently made obligatory (don't quote me on that) by EU called the PSD2 - Payment Services Directive 2.

It defines three independent APIs - AISP, CISP and PISP, each for a different set of actions one could perform.

I was only after AISP, or the Account Information Service Provider. It provides all the account and transactions information.

There was only one issue. I needed a client SSL certificate signed by a specific local CA to prove my identity to the API.

Okay, I could get that, it would cost like.. $15 - $50, but whatever. Cheap.

First issue - These certificates for the PSD2 are only issued to legal entities.

That was my first source of hate for politicians.

Then... As a cherry on top, I found out I'd also need a certification from the local capital bank which, you guessed it, is also only given to legal entities, while also being incredibly hard to get in and of itself, and so far, only one company in my country got it.

So here I am, reading through the documentation of something, that would completely satisfy all my needs, yet that is locked behind a stupid legal wall because politicians and laws gotta keep the technology back. And I can't help but seethe in anger towards both, the EU that made this regulation, and the fact that the bank even mentions this API anywhere.

Seriously, if 99.9% of programmers would never ever get access to that API, why bother mentioning it on your public main API page?!

It... It made me sad more than anything...

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....

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.

> 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.

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

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.

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?

I was asked to look into a site I haven't actively developed since about 3-4 years. It should be a simple side-gig.
I was told this site has been actively developed by the person who came after me, and this person had a few other people help out as well.
The most daunting task in my head was to go through their changes and see why stuff is broken (I was told functionality had been removed, things were changed for the worse, etc etc).
I ssh into the machine and it works. For SOME reason I still have access, which is a good thing since there's literally nobody to ask for access at the moment.
I cd into the project, do a git remote get-url origin to see if they've changed the repo location. Doesn't work. There is no origin. It's "upstream" now. Ok, no biggie. git remote get-url upstream. Repo is still there. Good.
Just to check, see if there's anything untracked with git status. Nothing. Good.
What was the last thing that was worked on? git log --all --decorate --oneline --graph. Wait... Something about the commit message seems familiar. git log. .... This is *my* last commit message. The hell?
I open the repo in the browser, login with some credentials my browser had saved (again, good because I have no clue about the password). Repo hasn't gotten a commit since mine. That can't be right.
Check branches. Oh....Like a dozen new branches. Lots of commits with text that is really not helpful at all. Looks like they were trying to set up a pipeline and testing it out over and over again.
A lot of other changes including the deletion of a database config and schema changes. 0 tests. Doesn't seem like these changes were ever in production.
...
At least I don't have to rack my head trying to understand someone else's code but.... I might just have to throw everything that was done into the garbage. I'm not gonna be the one to push all these changes I don't know about to prod and see what breaks and what doesn't break
.
I feel bad for whoever worked on the codebase after me, because all their changes are now just a waste of time and space that will never be used.

The GitHub graphql API is pretty neat, mostly because it's a great example of a product where graphql has advantages over REST. As a code reviewer for repos with hundreds of simultaneous PRs, I use it to filter through branches for stuff that needs my attention the most.

NewRelic's NRQL API is also quite nice, as it provides an unusual but very direct interface into the underlying application metrics.

I'm also a big fan of launchlibrary, purely because I love spaceflight, and their API is an extremely rich and actively maintained resource. This makes it a great data source for playing around with plotting & statistics libraries — when I'm learning new languages or tools, I prefer to make something "real" rather than following a tutorial, and I often use launchlibrary as a fun and useful data backend.

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

Still have access to my last companies github. Went snooping and saw main branches ahead and behind in commits from dev branches.

Decided to look into the PRs, and found this gem from my incompetent old VP of engineering.

Same guy who fired all the developers to save on money, and then contracted us back to do our jobs at 3x the rate. Basically a business savant!

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

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

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

Nightmare IRL:

Your colleague is in PTO for 2 weeks.

You are in charge of maintaining his project along with yours, CI, code, tests and everything.

Your colleague's code base is a real master piece of shit when you look at it closer. By shit, I mean hardcoded values everywhere, random sleeps now and then, 20 if branches that could be replaced by maps, variables named a b c d everywhere, try catch to silence errors that should not be silenced, etc.

Your colleague left the CI and code broken as shit. Takes forever to run on my goddamn computer.

PMs are spamming you: "What is going on? It's red everywhere. Help! Plz fix this! We are going to release tomorrow!"

FML

The guy who became my manager just pushes to the prod branch.

On a repo where another team clearly set up development and production branches.

This guy has been pushing code like crazy and I always wanted to take my time setting things up properly in our team: TDD, CI/CD, etc.

Because he pushed so much he became my manager and I was seen as unproductive.

Data Science and software development best practices just dont coexist it seems.

Yeah yeah, it's up to me to start introducing good practices, but atm "getting it done" takes priority over the real based shit.

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 😭

I'm going on vacation next week, and all I need to do before then is finish up my three tickets. Two of them are done save a code review comment that amounts to combining two migrations -- 30 seconds of work. The other amounts to some research, then including some new images and passing it off to QA.

I finish the migrations, and run the fast migration script -- should take 10 minutes. I come back half an hour later, and it's sitting there, frozen. Whatever; I'll kill it and start it again. Failure: database doesn't exist. whatever, `mysql` `create database misery;` rerun. Frozen. FINE. I'll do the proper, longer script. Recreate the db, run the script.... STILL GODDAMN FREEZING.

WHATEVER.

Research time.
I switch branches, follow the code, and look for any reference to the images, asset directory, anything. There are none. I analyze the data we're sending to the third party (Apple); no references there either, yet they appear on-device. I scour the code for references for hours; none except for one ref in google-specific code. I grep every file in the entire codebase for any reference (another half hour) and find only that one ref. I give up. It works, somehow, and the how doesn't matter. I can just replace the images and all should be well. If it isn't, it will be super obvious during QA.

So... I'll just bug product for the new images, add them, and push. No need to run specs if all that's changed is some assets. I ask the lead product goon, and .... Slack shits the bed. The outage lasts for two hours and change.

Meanwhile, I'm still trying to run db migrations. shit keeps hanging.

Slack eventually comes back, and ... Mr. Product is long gone. fine, it's late, and I can't blame him for leaving for the night. I'll just do it tomorrow.

I make a drink. and another.
hard horchata is amazing. Sheelin white chocolate is amazing. Rum and Kahlua and milk is kind of amazing too. I'm on an alcoholic milk kick; sue me.

I randomly decide to switch branches and start the migration script again, because why not? I'm not doing anything else anyway. and while I'm at it, I randomly Slack again.

Hey, Product dude messaged me. He's totally confused as to what i want, and says "All I created was {exact thing i fucking asked for}". sfjaskfj. He asks for the current images so he can "noodle" on it and ofc realize that they're the same fucking things, and that all he needs to provide is the new "hero" banner. Just like I asked him for. whatever. I comply and send him the archive. he's offline for the night, and won't have the images "compiled" until tomorrow anyway. Back to drinking.

But before then, what about that migration I started? I check on it. it's fucking frozen. Because of course it fucking is.

I HAD FIFTEEN MINUTES OF FUCKING WORK TODAY, AND I WOULD BE DONE FOR NEARLY THREE FUCKING WEEKS.

UGH!

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 😳

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

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

I have a situation that is so out there I almost wouldn’t believe it if it wasn’t happening to me. The company I work at has three branches and around 100 employees. The owner of the company has a brother who needs a liver transplant. Two weeks ago, a company-wide memo went out that all employees would be required to undergo testing to see if they were a suitable liver donor for the owners brother. No exceptions.

Last week at the branch the owner works out of most of the time, his assistant went around to schedule days off for everyone so they could go get tested. People who declined were let go. One of these people was born with liver disease and therefore ineligible to donate. She had a doctor’s note. Other people also had medical reasons as well and some were just uncomfortable with the request and didn’t want to do it. One was pregnant. They were still terminated. My employer’s assistant has said that because our employment is at will, he can legally fire us.

I’m in remission from cancer. I’m ineligible to donate and any kind of surgery would put a major strain on my system. Even if I was healthy, I would still object to possibly being forced into donating an organ just to keep my job. Soon they will be scheduling people’s days off for testing at my branch.

I know this situation is nuts, but I don’t know what to do. I know I could just go for the testing and then be declined, but I don’t think I should have to do that. I’ve had enough with hospitals. Other coworkers who don’t have medical conditions are afraid they won’t be declined because they will be a match. I’m looking for another job but in the meantime I don’t know what to do and I and many of my coworkers are really stressed out.

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?

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

Installed SonarQube and Snyk on the CI/CD of a 2.5 year old project that only had a linter enabled previously.

Practically zero problems found. One minor problem (same code in different branches), a few false positives, and a few possible problems in dependencies that I have no control over.

Now wondering:
Am I really that good or are those tools just shit?

It's killing me.

This senior keeps doing all his fixes in the the same branch (named "develop-copy-{hisname}") and keeps merging it directly into develop and deployment branches. He has a lot of experience and therefore the manager gave him direct access to the branch.

The problem will arise when the QA team sends back one of the issues in the release back for changes. This never happened till date (his fixes are early and we vet all in-team changes, therefore he gets time to clean up his mess before the release date) but someday this will bite us in the ass.

I'm really unsure about ratting him out to the manager but I couldn't convince him to use separate branches (or separate commits) for different fixes. I couldn't convince him to add JIRA links/numbers into the commit messages either.

And, the junior devs I manage are getting inspired by him, and won't listen to me when I try to enforce separate branches, creating a political mess (probably I'm kinda like a contractor and they are permanent employees).

Sucks.

Quick maffs:
git checkout -
will switch to a branch you previously checked out. So you can quickly switch between branches

People don't seem to know how to properly do print-debugging, so here's a simple guide:

1. A log of "aaaaaa" or "got here" isn't as helpful as you think when ALL OF THEM ARE THE FUCKING SAME. You put a descriptive label or copy verbatim the conditional statement. This saves time matching statements, allows one to watch multiple branches at once, and allows others to understand and help faster when dragged in to help.
2. When trying to see where code fucks up, before each line, paste said line into a proper print statement for your language. If there's, say, a function call or some shit, have it output something like "functionCall(varA=<varA contents>,varB=<varB contents);" Most normal lines should be like this too, but it's especially helpful for calls and comparisons.
If need be, add return values after if they're not shown in another print statement later.
This allows for a trail of execution AND the line that fucks up will be the last in the log, making finding it easier when dealing with hangs and such.
3. Putting something unique like "DEBUG: " or something in front of all statements ensures you can just search for them to ensure you're not rolling one out to production. It also separates debug output from normal output at a glance, making digging through logs faster.

Why the hell do I have to keep showing everyone on my team how to use git. Learn it God dammit!!! Is not that hard. How come you freak out on a simple conflict? Why don't you delete your fucking merged branches?

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.

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

SVN.

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

So, I'm a veteran. I served in the Army as an information system operator/analyst. Glorified help desk, set up some equipment in the field, a few other small things. But I can make fun of vets, other branches, and those serving. I've paid my dues, and they're OK with it. Hell, they all do it too. But you have to be a vet or currently serving.

I feel like that with tech too. My buddies and I call each other geeks/nerds all the time. I get annoyed (read as pissed off) when someone from the outside does it.

I got an email from a recruiter that said something along the lines of "..basically a bunch of really smart nerds building software..." What the actual fuck? Go eat an entire bag of dicks, and choke on every single one.

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.

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.

daily.
PM/PO/SM/dev(new!): so i've continued working on feature X, i did this and that (shows screenshot of UI in Jira) and for today i'm planning to do XYZ. anyquestionsnothennextoneplease.
me: sorry, i have a question. did you persist your changes in our repo?
PM: no, not yet.
me: okay, please do this, you've spent several days of work on this. i mean, it's fine if build servers don't build it yet, that's what our feature branches are for.
PM: you're absolutely right, and i will definitely do it at some point.
me: at some point?
PM: yes. dev x, your update please.

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 🎉

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

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.

Merge VS Rebase:
- Did you pick a side?
- Practical tips? Like dealing with merge conflicts
- Have you ever regretted using either?

My answer
* My team squash-merges all branches to master so we don't really care what the branch history looks like. Master history should be pretty - but a branch history can be ugly and filled with a dozen commits.
* Practical tip 1: use `git config rerere.enabled true`. rerere stands for "reuse recorded resolution" and this means if you rebase often you don't have to resolve the same merge conflict twice.
* Practical tip 2: use `git commit --fixup oldcommithash` and then rebase with `--autosquash`
* I like using Rebase. But I have regretted the amount of time I've spent on trying to rebase old branches with many commits only to give up and to `git rebase --abort` since I realised I couldn't handle trying to reapply all the commits chronogically as the changes in the 1st commit were no longer relevant.

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!

I like my work, don't get me wrong, but any time I need to work with this fucking 12 years old project that has so many conflicting branches, css that remembers float layouts, half of the files not being tracked, ruby dependencies that are a decade outdated I just want to quit.

I'm trying really hard not to be sensitive, but my manager is making it difficult with their "constructive criticisms" ...

Just finished up a call with them. And I'm so tired. I'm not even angry or upset, I just feel so tired of their bullshit.

I set up a meeting as a courtesy to get them up to date on all the code changes I made. Last night I stayed up late to try and get things in before the deadline and this morning just killed me when they say.

"I don't think I should have given you this."

"I was right, you weren't ready to start doing this."
(Then don't even bother giving me anymore tasks then, I don't fucking care.)

"you clearly don't understand how branches work"
(Absolutely fucking false, I fixed that shit and am very familiar with how to understand the structure of the fucking repo)

"you are rushing and I don't need you messing up the website"
(I'm being proactive you twat, not rushing, making it very difficult for me to do the work and being productive)

Like seriously bro! Don't fucking patronize me for the work I was trying to get out. And trust me this fucking meeting is done in order to get ahead of potential issues, not a time to be condescending of my skills or lack there-of as you seem to so keenly think.

If you had this much doubt about my abilities then why give me the fucking Sr. title? Fucking trust that I'm being honest, and I'm trying to get us to a good spot, not fucking sabotage the company. God fucking damn.

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.

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*

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!

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.

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

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?

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.

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

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).

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'm unmotivated and tired today. I'm just running tests in different branches to see what bug I can find... and since the testing take 5 minutes to complete, I just watch videos in between...

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)

How ignorant we all are about the world. It's not necessarily a bad thing, just a fact. After a four year degree I've learnt so much, how a computer works from the physical phenomena on the hardware level to the inner workings of an OS to the highest level abstractions of modern web development, a wide array of programming languages covering several different paradigms, mathematics from calculus to statistics to algebra, how to work with databases, how to administrate a server, how to build a website, and much more.

And that's just in a degree. I have knowledge in one domain and I wouldn't even call myself an expert in it. Medicine, physics, biology, the hundreds of branches of engineering from civil to nautical to aerospace to automobile, to geology to meteorology to astronomy, to the practical application of this knowledge in hundreds of trades. There's so much more to know in so much depth and only recently have I realized how little we all know on an individual level.

Finding this out has been a mixed bag, on the one hand it's made me value what I know and what others can teach me a hell of a lot more, on the other, knowing that people haven't realized this and adamantly discuss and impose from a position of ignorance isn't very nice.

tl;dr I know that I know nothing

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

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.

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.

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.

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?

After completely testing 32 files, I realized I was on the wrong git branch 🤦

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

TL;DR

Got Salesforce customised by an external company, took over the code and wanted to cry.

So my company decided to get a new crm for sales with contract generation and a whole lot of fluff. Specs included an easy to implement API to connect to our in-house software and an easy to adjust contract Wizard.

After month of checking various companies the CEO finally settled on...
Drumroll
The cheapest German based company.
Turns out the only part that is based in Germany is the sales department, development is based in Poland which made for interesting times during implementation because of the language barrier that comes with non native english speakers.

We as in our development department for told that we wouldn't need to worry about the solution because it would all be developed and maintained by the new company. As we are fairly small that was more then welcome.

Fast forward to integration day. No docs for the API available, contract Wizard is hardcoded, bunch of errors and inconsistencies. Get tickets for them.
Ok we can deal with this. Just tell the ticket writer he needs to address the problems with the external. Yep, doesn't work. External fixes bugs and introduces then elsewhere.
Fml. Ok I'll take a look into the code. Ugh, Java, I hate that shit but at least I don't need to worry about all the fluff, just the code, so it's ok.
No repository present, code is developed in the Dev environment and pushed to prod. Ugly but works. Code comes with a lot of functions but only one real class called "CommonUtilities" ... even the web API is defined in there. Meanwhile my colleague throws out the need for the API because we will just directly tie to SOQL. I'll let's check what's going on here, nice you reused Lead/Account/Contact for the branch offices of companies as well...
Is not like Salesforce has a bunch of logic tied to these objects...
Nice the required implementation of an automatic holiday import is not even there, just a custom object populated with this year's data...

Tell CEO how badly all of this was handled. Nice note this dumpster fire is our new in-house project because CEO cancelled the contract with the external.

Ok we can deal with this, let's set up a repo, define the CI/CD and get the extensions for vscode. Nice now this all makes sense. Fix all bugs and reimplement the contract Wizard using custom objects that sales can change so the contract is actually easily customizable by a non dev. Implement branches as their own object to avoid opportunities, triggers and the likes to be executed for them.
Took a whole day. Why did these 2000 lines of code that was shipped to us take 3 month to implement?

Lesson learned: never trust an external to just do a good job.
New rule implemented by company to always have a Dev check in regular intervals on projects handled by externals for standards and overall logic

10k down the drain for what amounted to 2 weeks tops (one dev) if we had handled the implementation of Salesforce and all the requirements in-house

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.

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...

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. 😔

Do you think the keywords used by git (or other version control systems) are intuitive?

I'm talking to a very junior dev about git and I find myself having to explain around the fact that I don't feel the keywords are great. They are asking good questions like
* Why do you say "push the commit" but then say "make a pull request" - when I want to push why isn't it called a "push request"
* "Why are the metaphors sometimes related to trees (branches), sometimes roads (forks) but you still call it "master" instead of tree trunk or main road?
* Why do you call it "commit", what kind of commitment am I making?

Okay, wait, is it a common practice to push changes to master that you KNOW break some other features? I always assumed that that's what branches are for and master should be the "to the best of our knowledge it should be production ready"? But apparently in this company you need to hunt for the right revision, interrogating people why suddenly nothing works on your end and half the time it's "oh, this guy has been working on something and it broke half of the stuff others have been working on and isn't covered in tests yet. Use revision 21xkcd7a"

I don't think "main" is the best replacement for "master" on GitHub, I mean Git already uses branches so why not continue with the whole tree analogy and call it the "root" branch?

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

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.

my company is "pivoting" way too goddamn fast; they are pulling devs from other projects and throwing them into something that is a fragile system (was supposed to be replaced already) and is using a completely different stack than most of them usually work with. they keep promising 3rd parties that we will knock out their requirements within a week or two, and as such they are pushing haphazardly merged feature branches into production with absolutely no regression testing.

then when shit explodes and operations grinds to a halt, they tell the half of the team that actually knows how the system works to drop everything and fix it, and leave the diverted devs to continue to develop shit based on requirements drawn on a cocktail napkin, and then they fucking push both the hotfixes and the newest features at the same time.

I probably have the most tribal knowledge at this company, and they are paying me ok, so it's enough for me to just pour some rye and suck it up for the time being and milk the gig. but this can't be sustainable, right? i'm passively looking around for other work, as I've already had enough being here for over 3 years, but i'm finding most places to be slow on the application/hiring process lately due to covid.

Edit: i think i used the wrong tag here, but what the fuck ever. i haven't figured out how to tag shit properly on any platform

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

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."

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..

When you're clearly in the zone:

Excluding merges, 1 author has pushed 22 commits to master and 22 commits to all branches. On master, 70 files have changed and there have been 16,339 additions and 321 deletions.

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)

The feature was to parse a set of fairly complex xml files following a legacy schema. Problem was, the way this was done previously did not conform to the schema so it was a guideline at best, which over the course of many years snowballed into an anarchy where clients would send in whatever and it was continuously updated per case as needed. They wanted to start enforcing their new schema while phasing out the old method.

The good news is that parsing and serialization is very testable, so I rounded up what I could find of example files and got to work. Around the same time I asked our client if they had any more examples of typical cases we need to deal with, and sure enough a couple of days later I receive a zip with hundreds of files. They also point out that I should just disregard the entire old set since they decided to outright cut support for it after all if it makes things simpler. Nice.

I finish the feature in a decent amount of time. All my local tests pass, and the CD tests pass when I push my branches. Once we push to our QA env though and the integration tests run, we get a pass rate of less than 10%.

I spend a couple of days trying to figure out what's going on, and eventually narrow it down to some wires being crossed with the new vs. old xml formats. I'm at a loss. I keep trying to chip away at it until I'm left with a minimal example, and I have one of those lean-back moments where you're just "I don't get it". My tests pass locally, but in the QA environment they fail on the same files.

We're now 3 people around my workstation including the system architect, and I'm demonstrating to the others how baffling and black magic this is. I postulate that maybe something is cached in my local environment and it's not actually testing the new files. I even deleted the old ones.

"Are you sure you deleted the right files?"

"Duh of course -- but let me check..."

Hello all,

I am an apprentice, 19. I joined this software developer apprenticeship to leave college as it was not particularly great for my mental health, and programming is the only thing I can do reasonably well.

The company that I find myself in is a strange one. It has about twenty or so employees, but we all instructed to operate as if we are a giant company—our sales person, for example, will tell our clients that we have hundreds.

The development team is a collection of software developers. There is no database administrator, network administrator, software engineer (not in name only), test engineer, requirements engineer, etc. There are just several software developers. Of these developers, one has left by now. When he joined, he was promised to be working on a new system: he left after spending seven years on an old system. A new developer has just arrived to replace him: he was told he would be working with Raspberry Pis; it was interesting to see his face after we informed him that we do not use Raspberry Pis.

The codebase is fourty-years-old and written in Delphi, which is some kind of cousin of pascal, from what I understand. Code is not peer-reviewed. Instead, it is self-reviewed, and you just push whatever changes you make. The code is very much spaghetti, and there is a whole array of bugs that, at least to me, look impossible to track down and fix. I have a bug assigned to me at the moment were someone appears somewhere when they are not supposed to. After asking seniors about this, I learn of this huge checking mechanism and all of its flaws: a huge, flawed checking mechanism... for toggling a single boolean value. This isn't a complicated boolean value, by the way, this is just a value to say whether someone has clocked in or clocked out of a building, via a button.

In terms of versioning, we have several releases, and we often do development work in older releases (or new releases and then write them into older releases) because our clients are larger than us and often refuse to upgrade, and the boss does not want to lose any contracts. We also essentially have multiple master branches.

With the lack of testers, bizarre version control, what appears to be unfiffled promises to staff, etc. I must ask that, since this is my first gig as a software developer, is any of this normal?

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

We want one system for all our branches with booking and (inserts 73 huge features crucial to business operations)

- okay, *sends quotation*

You know, we just want a custom made website with (insert 23 major features)

- okay, *sends quotation*

You know, we want a wordpress site, we can expand late

- ...

So I made a new GitHub repo and pushed some changes to it, but they didn’t show up. Then I noticed that there are two branches to my project— main and master. And my changes were pushed to the master (coz I did git push origin master) and the default name is now configured to main. So this is what some of you guys were irritated about— changing words like master-slave to primary-secondary for political correctness and all.

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.

NEVER maintain multiple release branches as a maintainer, period.

Given enough PRs, nobody, not even god-tier maintainers, is able to keep track of all commits and the whole context/story behind it.

Remember that people ALWAYS PR against your master and nobody even cares about your whatever-named-next-branch buried deep inside your feature branches.

Please make it easy for others if you want actual contributions.

You know what fuck github , anyone remember when git cli was easy and straight forward to use

Now i have conflicting master branches because the remote is main and git automatically defaults to master.

Git still asks for a password while github can't wait to inform me how I have to go through the very long process of setting up an auth_token.

Apparently https remote origins for some reason don't work anymore, why because apparently i need to change them into ssh, good luck with the public key errors

This sucks , fuck github and fuck politics

I’m currently working with a devops team in the company to migrate our old ass jboss servers architecture to kubernetes.

They’ve been working in this for about a year now, and it was supposed to be delivered a few months back, no one knew what’s going on and last week they manage to have something to see at least.

I’ve never seen anything so bad in my short life as a developer, at the point that the main devops guy can’t even understand his own documentation to add ci/cd to a project.

It goes from trigger manually pipelines in multiple branches for configuration and secrets, a million unnecessary env variables to set, to docker images lacking almost all requisites necessary to run the apps.

You can clearly see the dude goes around internet copy pasting stuff without actually understanding what going on behind as every time you ask him for the guts of the architecture he changes the topic.

And the worst of all this, as my team is their counterpart on development we’ve fighting for weeks to make them understand that is impossible the proceed with this process with over 100 apps and 50+ developers.

Long story short, last two weeks I’ve been fixing the “dev ops” guy mess in terms of processes and documentation but I think this is gonna end really bad, not to sound cocky or anything but developers level is really low, add docker and k8s in top of that and you have a recipe for disaster.

Still enjoying as I have no fault there, and dude got busted.

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.

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"?

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!"

Today I could finally spend some time reviewing the merge requests an intern made (and I occasionally helped).

My god, I want to put it this months amount of work an, put it in a trash, burn it and rewrite it before the fire is gone.

5 small and unrelated issues. The intern used branches with the correct naming scheme, but IT'S A FUCKING STRAIGHT LINE BUILDING ON TOP OF EACHOTHER.

Oh ans also they took the liberty to update the dependencies and the language versions used. There was no issue regarding this. It's the first branch in the line and it was called "update_<dependency>" where they just upped the version numbers of everything and then COMMENT OUT all mentions of <dependency> so that it compiles at the very least.

Now today I spend most of my time reviewing the code by fixing that mess. Thanks to updates I had to update the CI and replace some libraries that are now incompatible. Tomorrow I can finally inspect the shit itself.

On a positive side node, I removed node as a dev dependency and the size of the node modules went down from 128mb to 18mb

In my previous rant:
Last week I resigned, in the meantime they've completely reworked the git flow process and made PR's optional, among other stuff.

Today: "Architects" ask that we stop creating tags. We're replacing release tags with release branches.

I feel dirty only for imagining having to do a "git checkout -b "v1.2.3".

Good times :)

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**

I don’t know why/how, but some guy in my team put the node_modules folder on GitHub.

This person ran *npx create-react-app* and for whatever reason probably DELETED the .gitignore.

I had to fix it of course, and in the meanwhile I forgot to switch branches before changing everything, making git crash because switching branches with +4 million lines of code deleted was too much.

Why don't they let experienced front-end devs initialize projects? I don’t understand.

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

How do you clean up branches while working with PR ?!

It’s a nightmare. For each “bug” or feture there is a pull request created. As far as I know you MUST create a branch.

It’s easy to clean up GitHub (I’m just deleting branch after accepting PR. Which actually doesn’t even delete it for X days or something).

But local branches. OMG. It takes me at least 10 min/week to clean up and some of our devs don’t bother. They literally have 50+ local branches.

How do you manage that ?

I’m just about to write a script which deletes every local branch except selected (Yep UI with list of branches). But seems like overkill.

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

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

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.

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.

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.

What a joy working in a company that uses git as if it's subversion (dev branches? What are dev branches?) paired with gerrit. Getting a single, crucial change pushed to the actual repo can take days. The speed of the site can be measured in geological epochs. The interface has a charm of windows 95. Half of the builds are broken. Life is fleeting and I'm wasting it 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? 😔

I have found that once you work for a company where you have to implement everything in its raw form using the raw language and raw logic, you really have to know what you're doing and knowing some basic/medium programming and having some algebra knowledge doesn't cut it (unlike some people think).

I've been at two sides of the coin: I worked for a company that had everything in place, a framework that handled all edge cases and what not and I just had to focus on user stories, but I also worked for a company where I had to do everything manually.

For example, at the latter company I had to know Discrete Mathematics; truth tables to their most convoluted and disgusting form, having to be able to apply this on a late Friday night with a headache and lack of food and sleep with the PM stressing out.
I've had to deal with NOT AND OR AND OR AND OR AND branches or whatever, where an OR behaves like an AND and if you want a value between an AND AND and an OR, you'd have to do a NOT OR.. to think about latches, all in my head, sigh, anyway, within limited time constraints, without even having time to write tests, having to make sure that everything checks out while the client is breathing down my neck. Yeah, not such fun times.

I'm happy for those of you who can just write some moderately difficult logic but you don't have to break your head over doing everything manually, as if you're in the coding stone age and nothing is taken care of.
Companies like these make me want to run away.

When you try to merge branches :D

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?

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."

Ok finally, I can tell now.

There's a college project I'm in with 2 more people that uses Python and AnyLogic (separately).
We also need to write some LaTeX, so as I was already using PyCharm for the Pyshit, I used it for the LaTeX and for Git.
I used it for Git too because I didn't know how it used Git and was worried that if I used the console it didn't recognize something or glitched out or something. And what the hell, it's a mature IDE, what could be so hard or possibly go wrong?

I had to re download the repo a couple of times because between pushes, pulls, merges and commits something happened and the repo ended in a weird state.
These are all the things I do:
Add, commit, create branches, merge, push, pull and delete branches.

So, I hadn't opened in some time. The last time I tried to bring something from another branch, and stayed up late to finish something. I was waiting for my classmates to join the call when I thought something like "Hey, I should commit what I did until now, it worked great.". When I examined the IDE I found out I was in the middle of a rebase or something. I start clicking buttons to at least try to commit. I press "Skip Commit". I lose everything.

What the fuck‽ As you can see in the comprehensive list above, I never do something similar to a rebase. Apparently when I tried to merge a couple of branches, the stupid IDE thought I tried to do a rebase and never asked me to finish it. Why do something I have never asked? Plus, why haven't you prompted me to finish the operation? That's so stupid. I'm never trusting IDEs again.
I was so lit for losing so many hours of work I did a couple of weeks before, I would have to think it and do it all over again because of something I never asked.

We spent an hour looking for a way to recover the lost code.
Why an hour, you ask, if you can use the Local History for that in PyCharm?
Because none of us had used it before and the articles we found said that you had to open it from the toolbar. From the toolbar it was greyed out.
Then I found the option in the contextual menu of the files. Recovered the LaTeX files but on the AnyLogic files, it was greyed out.
I had to open the Local History of the folder containing the AnyLogic file.
And that was that.

I almost faint.
Fuck Python, fuck PyCharm.

After merging 2 branches, Git randomly decided not to merge one particular line (the place where my newly defined function was called) and that caused a fixed bug to reappear. First time in 4 years I am witnessing Git do something strange like this— probably an issue in the “merge by ort strategy”.

Best and worse IDE feature for you.
Me :
IDE : VS2019
Best : Conditional break points (cf image)
Worst : Git branches management (For example : can’t delete multiple branches at the same time)