5 ms·

For a lot of candidates, "we don't really view source control as something we need to innovate on and prefer to ship features" is the right answer, and if that'

For a lot of candidates, "we don't really view source control as something we need to innovate on and prefer to ship features" is the right answer, and if that's your answer and the person is combative about it, well, that sounds like you just got a pretty clear signal about hiring that person, which is the whole point of interviewing anyway.

OJFord 4y ago
I'm not suggesting being 'combative about it', I just don't want to work somewhere that doesn't use SVC, I'd have to really want to work there for other reasons to learn subversion/mecurial/whatever (though maybe something newer than git, like pijul, would be interesting rather than annoying), isn't it in both our interests that I don't have a nasty surprise after joining? Nor do I want to 'innovate on' on SVC, btw... If anything I'm saying the opposite aren't I? Git's what I know, and it's so fundamental/used so much throughout my day that it's a tool I wouldn't really want to be without. Hard to explain perhaps, considering I wouldn't have a problem with a new language (immediate turn-off when I get recruitment spam looking for a 'python/django engineer' or whatever - yes I have experience doing that but that's not how I'd categorise myself) but it makes sense to me. I just mean, if it hadn't already come up/been mentioned, when they invariably asked 'any questions for us', I'd now (having thought about this before but not interviewed since) at least ask if they could tell me a bit about the hardware the provide and tools/processes they use. Just a question, nothing 'combative' about it.