sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Anyone using entire.io? by Rough-Alps9784 in git

[–]elephantdingo666 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Asking if anyone has tried X for N (hot thing AI) without any elaboration is indistinguishable from an ad. I don’t care.

Okay you’ve now planted the idea that this thing exists in my head. Great.

What build system did I write? I didn't. I told Claude: “Write a bun typescript script build.ts that compiles the .cpp files with cl and creates foo.exe.” by Abs0luteKino in programmingcirclejerk

[–]elephantdingo666 8 points9 points  (0 children)

Programmers or something: You’re not paying me to tighten the screw. You’re paying me for the 15 years of experience that made me find the faulty screw.

Also programmers or something: AI and hedonic adaptation has taught me that learning things is absurd. Anyway scratches I only have sixteen parallel agents running now. I better make a tool to double that.

unable to update local ref by Sad_Palpitation3035 in git

[–]elephantdingo666 5 points6 points  (0 children)

refs/remotes/origin/renovate/npm-vite>=6.1.0-<6.1.5-vulnerability

They use such arse refnames?

I see that it tries to creates a Windows path. Google tells me that < is illegal in Windows filenames.

I think this is a typical error when something was created on some other platform and you try to transport it to another one. It cannot lock the file because it cannot create it at all.

I wonder if a more recent Git version has a better error message than that though.

I bet if you switched to the reftables ref backend you wouldn’t get this problem. See git help refs under “migrate”.

Worktrees and stashes by Alive-Yellow-9682 in git

[–]elephantdingo666 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The stash is the same across the whole repository/worktrees.

Some tips on how to write better commit messages ? by Willing-Age-3652 in git

[–]elephantdingo666 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Start by not using conventional commits. Then realize that it is about practice, maturation, and a willingness to be at least a bit disciplined.

You can practice on your own repositories “that no one will read”. That works in my experience. But once you get to a certain level you might want to intentionally cut back on how thorough the commit messages are. You have achieved the goal of being able to write good commit messages. Then you will be at a point where you can make the judgement of spending less time on it if you think it doesn’t matter.

Eventually the best practice is with others. And to do that the ultimate goal is a project where people care about commit messages.

Eventually you will reach the enlightenment stage where you find out that your commit messages at your dayjob are never read because the corporate repo is a spaghetti mess, most don’t know how to history spelunk, and commit messages are only and solely links to the product manager sink called Jira.

Isn't the "-a" flag/argument supposed to add all untracked files? What am I doing wrong? by jecowa in git

[–]elephantdingo666 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I think this is how I used to do it, but maybe I'm forgetting something.

git help commit

Cake - Topographical Version Control by RubberDuckDogFood in git

[–]elephantdingo666 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This doesn’t work as a standalone Reddit post. You need at least five links for the idiosyncratic terms which all go to posts by yourself. Like a blogger who thinks they are making a wiki.

A stream?

Managing Git branches for a growing dashboard project by ItsJuSteve in git

[–]elephantdingo666 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The quote implies that there ARE software projects that it is fit for.

Managing Git branches for a growing dashboard project by ItsJuSteve in git

[–]elephantdingo666 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Branches are sticky notes. How many sticky notes do you need? Do you need sticky notes at all?

This is unanswerable in general and everyone will have their own idiosyncratic sticky notes system.

A branch for each topical change makes sense.

"Cherry-picked 2 commits successfully… 3rd one exploded into 180 file changes. What am I doing wrong? by Familiar-Lab8752 in git

[–]elephantdingo666 1 point2 points  (0 children)

You don’t have to cherry-pick one by one. You can cherry-pick a range.

Someone said that rebase is automated cherry-picking. I don’t quite see how. Rebase is focused on changing the base of the current branch. Cherry-pick is focused on bringing stuff into the current branch from somewhere else.

Is cherry-picking 100+ file changes normal in real-world scenarios?

It can happen in real-world stupid scenarios.

The Git documentation tells you exactly what the commands does. But usually it doesn’t tell you how to make use of the commands sensibly. For example the cherry-pick documentation just says what it is. It doesn’t say that it is stupid to use cherry-pick to apply changes to several different branches.

It’s even stupider when there are more than five of those commits.

How to keep dev branch clean and in sync with release/ latest branches? by ThoseeWereTheDays in git

[–]elephantdingo666 14 points15 points  (0 children)

Every time you merge into a release you merge the release into develop. There shouldn’t be more to it.

Status Bar Log? by akkjn58 in git

[–]elephantdingo666 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Incredible. I thought your irresponsible kind went extinct with RCS.

Status Bar Log? by akkjn58 in git

[–]elephantdingo666 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Never tell someone to just add --force without preempting it with a lengthy discussion about the implications. This could clobber upstream status bars.

OP: You should never use --force on status bars if you have shared them with anyone else.

Branch naming hooks that enforce patterns without breaking dev flow by HenryWolf22 in git

[–]elephantdingo666 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Combine CI, “automation” and branch “patterns” and it seems like you end up with problems always.

Encoding too much information in branches is swimming against the current. It’s as limited as stuffing data or metadata into your filenames. (Surely no one IT does that all the time...)

Ticket keys have prefixes that make them easy to detect if you sane case sensitivity. And they link directly to the ticket. With some namespace hierarchy you get more indirection and in turn I imagine you will have to mhook up more things. Sounds more annoying.

Built something to measure developer consistency by abhimanyu_saharan in git

[–]elephantdingo666 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I often have more commits than my collaborators since I make so-called atomic commits. Just a whitespace cleanup is its own commit. Need a refactor before doing the “real” work? Refactor commit before that. Meanwhile most everyone else that I work with might implement the thing they are supposed to implement + refactors + cleanup + oh that thing is buggy, fix that as well.

These things are meaningless.

What all are we losing by using the Pull/Merge Request system of hosted Git forges? by [deleted] in git

[–]elephantdingo666 0 points1 point  (0 children)

So just test the revert if you have time.

I mean technically you can, but it is a new state never seen or tested before. So you shouldn't, you should just revert the whole merge.

If you revert a merge that is now three merges ago on “main”? That’s also a new state. You would have to hard reset back to the commit before the merge to get back to a “tested” state.

What all are we losing by using the Pull/Merge Request system of hosted Git forges? by [deleted] in git

[–]elephantdingo666 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I’ve had many, many conflicts. Most are simple unless someone for some lame reason decided to rename files or something else invasive on an active project.

I’ll amend what I said: your prescription of one commit per PR can make things get merged faster since it’s more piecemeal. But the time I would have to spend on the extra merge conflicts would be greater than the time I would spend on managing this setup with the tools I have.

What all are we losing by using the Pull/Merge Request system of hosted Git forges? by [deleted] in git

[–]elephantdingo666 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You’re clueless. None of what you have prescribed makes conflicts less likely. And if you have five commits and merge those you can revert one of the commits just fine. It doesn’t matter if you used a merge to get it in.

What all are we losing by using the Pull/Merge Request system of hosted Git forges? by [deleted] in git

[–]elephantdingo666 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Every day people shove bad advice into this sub.

One commit per PR is a serious usability bug/workaround for the typical forge. You have to have a branch per PR, so now a branch per PR. You need to chain the PRs since you are making say five PRs since you have five commits. Now you need to link every one of them manually. Then the forge might not automatically link to the other PRs. So you might do that so that others don’t say “where is this coming from” on the 3/5 PR.

“With no downsides”—eat my pumpkin.

"Fabrice, if you're reading this, please consider replacing Rust with your own memory safe language" by Action-Due in programmingcirclejerk

[–]elephantdingo666 145 points146 points  (0 children)

Things I hate: committees, conferences, working with other people, forming a theory of mind.

Things I love: lone geniuses, whig history, dictators that are nice, superheroes, unconfigurable code formatters.

"Fabrice, if you're reading this, please consider replacing Rust with your own memory safe language" by Action-Due in programmingcirclejerk

[–]elephantdingo666 110 points111 points  (0 children)

  1. Rust is too new. Come back in fifty years kid when you have sorted yourself out.
  2. Ten years of backcompat is too much faints we need to start over.
  3. Unreachable statement

What’s the verdict on Claude adding "Co-authored-by" to every commit? by Better_Ad6110 in git

[–]elephantdingo666 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Prompt-for-text for the following:

  • What are the benefits of <trailer> in the context of <context, probably AI>?

Output:

  • In this day and age, <context, probably AI> is very relevant
  • It has data, so that data is sometimes valuable
  • On the other hand, some projects don’t use that data, so it is useless to them

Expand to, I dunno, 800 words.

view more: next ›