3 ms·

The fundamental problem with Github profiles is that they are easily gamed. Once it becomes common practice, everyone will have a Github account with lots of c

The fundamental problem with Github profiles is that they are easily gamed. Once it becomes common practice, everyone will have a Github account with lots of code -- and I suspect a lot they didn't write. As much as Fizzbuzz (or equivalents) are despised, I think it is still probably a more useful first-level filters. But not much more.

jaggederest 13y ago
The problem with that, is that the depth of github is pretty hard to fake. Sure, you can have repos with code in them, but the time of day you commit, what your commits look like, how you work, is well documented.
- kenjackson 13y ago
  That assume everyone works the same way on Github. The code I host on Github for me is old code. So I have big commits and then long lulls. As noted by the author, a lot of people don't use it as their primary repository.
- tmarthal 13y ago
  I think that is the author's point though: he has a lots of private repos on bitbucket that he doesn't want to share. The work history and depth of his code and such is not publicized. Note also that this is the same for private repos hosted on github. When you are logged in, you can see the activity and commits of yourself (and your teammates) in all of the public+private repos that you have access to, but your public profile only shows public commits. This is by design. Here is my example image, when I was doing a bunch of work at the start of the year in some private repos: http://imgur.com/4Tr3LQz http://imgur.com/4Tr3LQz The top is my public activity and the bottom one is my public+private activity. So if you're used to working out of private repos, then nothing is publicly documented and your actual github profile is not very 'deep'.
  - jaggederest 13y ago
    My point was, you can't just fake it because development history looks very different than 'copy and pasted code in' history. All of that is true, but my point is that you can't just gin up fake repositories to look good on a resume.
    - otakucode 13y ago
      You've just given me an idea for a project.

jaggederest 13y ago

The problem with that, is that the depth of github is pretty hard to fake. Sure, you can have repos with code in them, but the time of day you commit, what your commits look like, how you work, is well documented.

kenjackson 13y ago
That assume everyone works the same way on Github. The code I host on Github for me is old code. So I have big commits and then long lulls. As noted by the author, a lot of people don't use it as their primary repository.
tmarthal 13y ago
I think that is the author's point though: he has a lots of private repos on bitbucket that he doesn't want to share. The work history and depth of his code and such is not publicized. Note also that this is the same for private repos hosted on github. When you are logged in, you can see the activity and commits of yourself (and your teammates) in all of the public+private repos that you have access to, but your public profile only shows public commits. This is by design. Here is my example image, when I was doing a bunch of work at the start of the year in some private repos: http://imgur.com/4Tr3LQz http://imgur.com/4Tr3LQz The top is my public activity and the bottom one is my public+private activity. So if you're used to working out of private repos, then nothing is publicly documented and your actual github profile is not very 'deep'.
- jaggederest 13y ago
  My point was, you can't just fake it because development history looks very different than 'copy and pasted code in' history. All of that is true, but my point is that you can't just gin up fake repositories to look good on a resume.
  - otakucode 13y ago
    You've just given me an idea for a project.