cp index.php index.php-20250220The last one can easily describe Django. Feels like depending on the code base/your mistakes/people you work with can easily turn a normal project into a project where majority of the files is just migration files.
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 -fcp?💀
Perforce Helix, here I come!
That last one is more common than I’d like, a lot more
$ cp -r src/ src.old
No sir never seen it in me life, honest to god sir
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-project28Truly a Sisyphus tale
The last is just a normal git workflow, isn’t it?
I’m pretty sure it means, they copy and paste the project file and iterate the version number manually.
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.
It’s quantum stuff, I could do that, or I could not do that…
I’m sick…that’s my excuse…
Didn’t want to be mean with the meme
Don’t worry, it’s fun
As one of the maintainers of Mercurial, I take great offense in this meme. ;)
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.
What could possibly be preferrable to
git switch -c <branchname>?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).
I admit that I have been bitten by the fact that commits don’t have a “true home branch”.
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?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.
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!
the last one is just immutability, praised in modern JS / TS, albeit at the repo level
I “love” how JavaScript has slowly rediscovered every piece of functional programming wisdom that was developed before 1980.
Kind of, though they honestly just do pretend immutability. Object references are still copied everywhere.
All of javascript is kinda just pretend.
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.
Why did you mention git twice?
While TFS did support Git, I had to deal with the much worse TFVC for a long while, up until Azure DevOps came along.
MyProject - Copy v2.bak new NEW (3)/
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
And worse than all of those options is Visual Sourcesafe.
Fox Pro!
Shrug
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.
I do miss the tags of SVN that would replace certain strings on each commit such as the date, a version number, etc.
