4 ms·

Deleting omgs out of Rails

37 points by iamwil 17y ago

MindTwister 17y ago
Entertaining read, allmost like they did it all on purpose, I suppose this is what will happen when the lolcats takes over.
mfukar 17y ago
lolwtf
blasdel 17y ago
- # fucked + # TODO: Clean up A diff so petty it's almost wikipedian -- fix the fuckedness, not the language.
- boundlessdreamz 17y ago
  the advantage of putting the TODO there is that, some IDEs and tools allow you to see TODOs across the project. Even without that it is pretty easy to grep for "TODO". Otherwise you will have to have a list : fuck, fucked, screwed, shit ... :)
  - rnicholson 17y ago
    rake notes:custom ANNOTATION=fucked
    - dogas 17y ago
      ya learn something new every day.
- ramchip 17y ago
  - # OMG HAX - # TODO: remove hax + # TODO: remove hack Agreed. Some make sense by using clearer names (an object named 'omg' isn't very helpful), but others are rather pointless. Like here, there was already a TODO so it was fine, really.
- compay 17y ago
  Rails 3 is doing a lot to "fix the fuckedness." This was a patch from a contributor, not the implementation of some kind of puritanical new policy by the Rails core team. Personally I find the all the ZOMG comments in the source code stupid and annoying. Removing them was a good idea.
reggieband 17y ago
Maybe I'm getting old and humourless but I don't think omg is very funny anyway. When I worked at a place where we peer reviewed every check-in I was taken to task at least 2 or 3 times for putting in snarky comments. I am so glad now that my name wasn't associated with something like that. I've come across similar comments in code and I didn't think it was funny at all. Code in source control is like a tattoo. It brands you for life.
- hello_moto 17y ago
  Why is this guy getting down-modded? He is correct is he not? Those ugly comments are part of your online footprints... just like writing ugly blogs...
AndrewO 17y ago
I think it's fair to say that Git is going to be a major tool for software archeology and cultural studies of our little subculture. I can almost imagine someone reading through Rails commits in 30+ years who will have no idea what a LOLCat is. (Although I guess it's valid to wager what will last longer: Rails or LOLCats. IMHO, Rails has a slight edge.)
- ubernostrum 17y ago
  You seem to be assuming that git will still be around in 30 years, and that git-hosting sites will still be online with history from repositories that old. I'm not sure I'd bet on that happening.
  - AndrewO 17y ago
    I's say it's reasonable to think that it will always be around as long as someone has the code and the ability to compile it. It probably won't be the VCS of choice in 30 years, but for people with that kind of interest, I'm sure it'll be available. And hey, storage is cheap (and only getting cheaper). Even if Github, Sourceforge, etc are gone, barring a major calamity, I think it's safe to assume there will be a backup of those somewhere, even if it's offline.
  - chousuke 17y ago
    I don't think it's unlikely at all. Git might be succeeded by something, but certainly some projects will be around. For example, the Emacs repository (the git clone at least. I haven't checked bzr) has commits dated before my birth. Some of the history is certainly lost due to lossy conversion. RCS and CVS never were very good at tracking it anyway. However, any conversion from git is going to have to retain full history. (why would you convert to something inferior?) Furthermore, as git is distributed, the history of a project is fully contained within countless clones. I doubt any sufficiently popular open source project could just disappear from the internet. That's why the hosting sites don't matter either. If one goes down, it's trivial to migrate to another host.
    - 17y ago
whalesalad 17y ago
I love how you can refer to this url as well, so git like - http://github.com/rails/rails/commit/2ebea1c02 http://github.com/rails/rails/commit/2ebea1c02
cscotta 17y ago
This is pretty hilarious, but before we start making jokes about how Rails is powered by LOLcats, keep in mind that all but one file touched by this commit is a test or test-related code.
rudin 17y ago
Let's see his angle for doing this: From the contributor's website (http://lindsaar.net/about_mikel http://lindsaar.net/about_mikel): "I am a Scientologist and work full time as a volunteer for non profit organizations. It keeps me alive and I really enjoy helping people. You can see some of the work I do at the DrugFacts website." I find it funny that the probable lone Scientologist rails-contributer finds this more offensive (or at least annoying) than all the Christians involved.
dustingetz 17y ago
maybe it made the original developer smile, which was probably originally worth it. I know little things can totally impact my emotional state and thus productivity.

37 points by iamwil 17y ago

Entertaining read, allmost like they did it all on purpose, I suppose this is what will happen when the lolcats takes over.

mfukar 17y ago

lolwtf

blasdel 17y ago

- # fucked + # TODO: Clean up A diff so petty it's almost wikipedian -- fix the fuckedness, not the language.

boundlessdreamz 17y ago
the advantage of putting the TODO there is that, some IDEs and tools allow you to see TODOs across the project. Even without that it is pretty easy to grep for "TODO". Otherwise you will have to have a list : fuck, fucked, screwed, shit ... :)
- rnicholson 17y ago
  rake notes:custom ANNOTATION=fucked
  - dogas 17y ago
    ya learn something new every day.
ramchip 17y ago
- # OMG HAX - # TODO: remove hax + # TODO: remove hack Agreed. Some make sense by using clearer names (an object named 'omg' isn't very helpful), but others are rather pointless. Like here, there was already a TODO so it was fine, really.
compay 17y ago
Rails 3 is doing a lot to "fix the fuckedness." This was a patch from a contributor, not the implementation of some kind of puritanical new policy by the Rails core team. Personally I find the all the ZOMG comments in the source code stupid and annoying. Removing them was a good idea.

reggieband 17y ago

Maybe I'm getting old and humourless but I don't think omg is very funny anyway. When I worked at a place where we peer reviewed every check-in I was taken to task at least 2 or 3 times for putting in snarky comments. I am so glad now that my name wasn't associated with something like that. I've come across similar comments in code and I didn't think it was funny at all. Code in source control is like a tattoo. It brands you for life.

hello_moto 17y ago
Why is this guy getting down-modded? He is correct is he not? Those ugly comments are part of your online footprints... just like writing ugly blogs...

AndrewO 17y ago

I think it's fair to say that Git is going to be a major tool for software archeology and cultural studies of our little subculture. I can almost imagine someone reading through Rails commits in 30+ years who will have no idea what a LOLCat is. (Although I guess it's valid to wager what will last longer: Rails or LOLCats. IMHO, Rails has a slight edge.)

ubernostrum 17y ago
You seem to be assuming that git will still be around in 30 years, and that git-hosting sites will still be online with history from repositories that old. I'm not sure I'd bet on that happening.
- AndrewO 17y ago
  I's say it's reasonable to think that it will always be around as long as someone has the code and the ability to compile it. It probably won't be the VCS of choice in 30 years, but for people with that kind of interest, I'm sure it'll be available. And hey, storage is cheap (and only getting cheaper). Even if Github, Sourceforge, etc are gone, barring a major calamity, I think it's safe to assume there will be a backup of those somewhere, even if it's offline.
- chousuke 17y ago
  I don't think it's unlikely at all. Git might be succeeded by something, but certainly some projects will be around. For example, the Emacs repository (the git clone at least. I haven't checked bzr) has commits dated before my birth. Some of the history is certainly lost due to lossy conversion. RCS and CVS never were very good at tracking it anyway. However, any conversion from git is going to have to retain full history. (why would you convert to something inferior?) Furthermore, as git is distributed, the history of a project is fully contained within countless clones. I doubt any sufficiently popular open source project could just disappear from the internet. That's why the hosting sites don't matter either. If one goes down, it's trivial to migrate to another host.
  - 17y ago

whalesalad 17y ago

I love how you can refer to this url as well, so git like - http://github.com/rails/rails/commit/2ebea1c02 http://github.com/rails/rails/commit/2ebea1c02

cscotta 17y ago

This is pretty hilarious, but before we start making jokes about how Rails is powered by LOLcats, keep in mind that all but one file touched by this commit is a test or test-related code.

rudin 17y ago

Let's see his angle for doing this: From the contributor's website (http://lindsaar.net/about_mikel http://lindsaar.net/about_mikel): "I am a Scientologist and work full time as a volunteer for non profit organizations. It keeps me alive and I really enjoy helping people. You can see some of the work I do at the DrugFacts website." I find it funny that the probable lone Scientologist rails-contributer finds this more offensive (or at least annoying) than all the Christians involved.

dustingetz 17y ago

maybe it made the original developer smile, which was probably originally worth it. I know little things can totally impact my emotional state and thus productivity.