2 ms·
Honestly it came down to there being private keys and other shifty things in there at various points. Also there was a lot of old crap as we evolved the prototy
by EvilTrout 14y ago
Honestly it came down to there being private keys and other shifty things in there at various points. Also there was a lot of old crap as we evolved the prototype closer to what we released... We just thought it was a good idea.
- patio11 14y agoprivate keys and other shifty things This was a SOP at a company I worked at, for any repository, either for OSS or when delivered as work product to customers. We just didn't want to have to do a commit-by-commit, line-by-line audit for any of an unbounded universe of Things That Would Be Very Bad If They Leaked. A surprising amount of them are not things that are technical in nature -- for example, many developers treat commit messages as watercooler talk between themselves rather than something which could potentially be reviewed in a courtroom. (Guess the precipitating event: "Memo to all developers: One should never, ever, ever, ever, ever mention a developer who is no longer with the firm in a commit message.")
- mryan 14y ago> (Guess the precipitating event: "Memo to all developers: One should never, ever, ever, ever, ever mention a developer who is no longer with the firm in a commit message.") Is the purpose here to limit the amount of material that might show up in discovery, and therefore potentially be made public?
- rmc 14y agoIf X was made redundant rather than fired for incompetence, and then commits were to mention that X was a terrible developer, then if X sues for unfair dismissal, then you've just given X evidence that the company lied.
- danielweber 14y ago"They said I was redundant, but internal proof shows they think I sucked." Could you draw that out for me a little more? Because to me it seems backwards.
- rmc 14y agoIt's a non-perfect example. IANAL, but I think the main problem is that the company is caught lying.