• tetris11@lemmy.ml
    1 year
    cd ~/repos/work-project27
git checkout dev
git branch new_feature
### code for a few hours, close laptop, go to sleep, next morning
git checkout dev
### code for a few more hours, close laptop go to sleep, next morning
## "oh fuck, I already implemented this in new_feature but differently"
git checkout dev
git diff new_feature
## "oh no. oh no no no. oh fuck. I can't merge any of this upstream and my history is borked."
git clone git@workhub:work/work-project work-project28
cd ~/repos/work-project28
  • Tamlyn@lemmy.zip
    1 year

    At university there were some students that want to manage projekts in could storange. That was just stupid but i didn’t know it better at that time.

    • Jyek@sh.itjust.works
      1 year

      I’m pretty sure it means, they copy and paste the project file and iterate the version number manually.

  • mEEGal@lemmy.world
    1 year

    the last one is just immutability, praised in modern JS / TS, albeit at the repo level

    • frezik@midwest.social
      1 year

      I “love” how JavaScript has slowly rediscovered every piece of functional programming wisdom that was developed before 1980.

      • expr@programming.dev
        1 year

        Kind of, though they honestly just do pretend immutability. Object references are still copied everywhere.

        • frezik@midwest.social
          1 year

          I find you need the whole ecosystem to support immutability to make it work. Every library needs to be based around it. Elixir is about the only modern option that does.

  • Ugurcan@lemmy.world
    1 year

    It’s actually a pretty good idea to have a full system snapshot time to time, where the project can compile successfully, for future Virtual Machine use. It’s usually easier to spin a VM than setting up the whole dev environment from scratch.

    • lars@lemmy.sdf.org
      1 year

      And when it’s release, then you rename it to

      MyProject - Copy v2.bak new NEW (3) FINAL.2-19-24/

      and then at the next standup, we all ponder how we can rename it to

      MyProject - Copy v2.bak new NEW (3) FINAL.2/19/24/

      because the team lead needs m/d/yy names with forward slashes

  • Alphare@lemmy.world
    1 year

    As one of the maintainers of Mercurial, I take great offense in this meme. ;)

    • nogooduser@lemmy.worldEnglish
      1 year

      It’s definitely up with Git in my opinion. I much prefer the branching in Mercurial.

      It’s certainly very offensive to lump it in the same band as SVN and TFVC.

        • nogooduser@lemmy.worldEnglish
          1 year

          It’s not the mechanism of branching that I prefer.

          It’s the fact that Mercurial tags the commit with the name of the branch that it was committed to which makes it much easier to determine whether a commit is included in your current branch or not.

          Also, Mercurial has a powerful revision search feature built in which I love (https://www.mercurial-scm.org/doc/hg.1.html#revisions).

          • bleistift2@sopuli.xyzEnglish
            1 year

            I admit that I have been bitten by the fact that commits don’t have a “true home branch”.

          • balsoft@lemmy.ml
            1 year

            It’s the fact that Mercurial tags the commit with the name of the branch that it was committed to which makes it much easier to determine whether a commit is included in your current branch or not.

            Isn’t this trivial in Git too? git branch --contains COMMIT ?

            • Alphare@lemmy.world
              1 year

              Sure, if you want to do it once, but Git still has to compute that information (save for a new-ish cache that is just that, a cache). But that is not the point really, the point is that Mercurial’s graph Is the same (topologically) everywhere, which is not the case in Git because branches (and thus remotes) have different names. So saying that a branch contains a commit is not the same as a commit being on a branch. There are a bunch of great properties that emerge from this but it’s too long for this comment and I should actually properly write this down at some point this year.

      • Alphare@lemmy.world
        1 year

        Given that Git and Mercurial were both created around April 2005 to serve the same purpose by very similar people for the same reason… I’d say it’s fair!

  • Matriks404@lemmy.world
    1 year

    Git is so ready to understand, that I don’t understand how people work without it.

    • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
      1 year

      It’s one of those things that’s hard to really understand why it’s so useful, until you actually use it.

  • yogsototh@programming.dev
    1 year
    cp $fic $fic.$(date -Iseconds)
git commit -a -m "save at $(date -Iseconds)"
# edit $fic
git commit -a -m "save at $(date -Iseconds)"
git push -f
  • parpol@programming.dev
    1 year

    Couldn’t add perforce to the list because someone else was checking it out, I see.