3 ms·

I think this passes the buck a little. There are a lot of problems created by software engineers and software engineers alone. There are of course management p

by bmitc 4y ago

I think this passes the buck a little. There are a lot of problems created by software engineers and software engineers alone. There are of course management problems, but that happens in every field. Software isn't special in that regard. My issue with software is that, in general, the software industry is both myopic, clinging to some bygone coding aesthetic of the 80s, and discontented, constantly creating new stuff or wanting to complicate stacks. Just look at the current status quo of source code management in Git. Management didn't make that decision. Software engineers did. Git is the most overly complicated software ever for its purpose, but it was software engineers who chose it as the standard and decided everyone needed to code as if they're on the Linux kernel team.

ElKrist 4y ago
I'm curious about your opinion on Git. It's actually a tool I'm excited to teach to non-developer people who deal with text documents and the need to keep a history, multiple versions etc. I'm aware that now these features are integrated in some common offices apps so there's less of a need for Git there. However what's wrong about Git for code? How would you cover the same features differently? When I say "Git" I refer to all the ecosystem that's based on Git, including GUIs for those who don't like the command line
- MrTortoise 4y ago
  its like using the army to watch over kids crossing the road to school Many other source control systems with far simpler systems this whole branch and pr into merge process didn't exist 10 years ago like it does now. It started from open source and low trust - but nobody stopped to ask what problem it solves. If somebody needs to check your code as part of a formal process - rather than some arbitrary invitation you issue in special cases - you shouldn't of been hired with the job of writing code.
- bmitc 4y ago
  Source code control is important, but Git is not the only source code control system.
bartread 4y ago
> Git is the most overly complicated software ever for its purpose Sorry, but I call bullshit on this. Git has a lot of features. Most people probably don't use or need most of those features. Maybe it's like Microsoft Word, where the quip is that people only use 20% of the features, but it's a different 20% for each person. That's not relevant. What is relevant is that to use Git effectively for most projects you don't need to know that much, you don't need to get into the "advanced" features, and in fact can learn everything you do need to know by reading only the first 3 chapters of the manual, and knowledge of the "git flow" workflow (you can of course modify this to your needs). It is not harder to effectively version control your software with Git as compared to any other VCS/SCM I've used and, in fact, branching and merging is excellent, and makes life a lot easier for everyone involved. Pull requests also make life very easy as compared to other systems. Switching to Git, within a few days it was apparent to me that it was better and easier than CVS, SourceSafe (!), Subversion, Sourcegear Vault, Perforce, and AccuRev (I can't speak to others because I haven't been exposed to them). Of course, you can make Git complicated - or perhaps I should say more complicated than you need to for your use case - but that's optional and entirely on you (or other devs you work with - in either case, Git isn't your problem).
- bmitc 4y ago
  Git is complicated. I or others didn't make it so. The fact that someone didn't tip-toe around Git's complexity in just the right way isn't on them. It's on Git. I also didn't name Git's commands, like the unfortunate `blame`, or design its interface such that there are several examples of `git <command> --<flag>` doing something wildly different than `git <command>`.

by bmitc 4y ago

ElKrist 4y ago

I'm curious about your opinion on Git. It's actually a tool I'm excited to teach to non-developer people who deal with text documents and the need to keep a history, multiple versions etc. I'm aware that now these features are integrated in some common offices apps so there's less of a need for Git there. However what's wrong about Git for code? How would you cover the same features differently? When I say "Git" I refer to all the ecosystem that's based on Git, including GUIs for those who don't like the command line

MrTortoise 4y ago
its like using the army to watch over kids crossing the road to school Many other source control systems with far simpler systems this whole branch and pr into merge process didn't exist 10 years ago like it does now. It started from open source and low trust - but nobody stopped to ask what problem it solves. If somebody needs to check your code as part of a formal process - rather than some arbitrary invitation you issue in special cases - you shouldn't of been hired with the job of writing code.
bmitc 4y ago
Source code control is important, but Git is not the only source code control system.

bartread 4y ago

> Git is the most overly complicated software ever for its purpose Sorry, but I call bullshit on this. Git has a lot of features. Most people probably don't use or need most of those features. Maybe it's like Microsoft Word, where the quip is that people only use 20% of the features, but it's a different 20% for each person. That's not relevant. What is relevant is that to use Git effectively for most projects you don't need to know that much, you don't need to get into the "advanced" features, and in fact can learn everything you do need to know by reading only the first 3 chapters of the manual, and knowledge of the "git flow" workflow (you can of course modify this to your needs). It is not harder to effectively version control your software with Git as compared to any other VCS/SCM I've used and, in fact, branching and merging is excellent, and makes life a lot easier for everyone involved. Pull requests also make life very easy as compared to other systems. Switching to Git, within a few days it was apparent to me that it was better and easier than CVS, SourceSafe (!), Subversion, Sourcegear Vault, Perforce, and AccuRev (I can't speak to others because I haven't been exposed to them). Of course, you can make Git complicated - or perhaps I should say more complicated than you need to for your use case - but that's optional and entirely on you (or other devs you work with - in either case, Git isn't your problem).

bmitc 4y ago
Git is complicated. I or others didn't make it so. The fact that someone didn't tip-toe around Git's complexity in just the right way isn't on them. It's on Git. I also didn't name Git's commands, like the unfortunate `blame`, or design its interface such that there are several examples of `git <command> --<flag>` doing something wildly different than `git <command>`.