schacon

6 ms·

31.
by schacon 6mo ago
Git is awesome in lots of ways. As a data storage layer and as a transport protocol, it's pretty great. The porcelain was built for a different era and is slow to adapt. Originally, Git was meant to just be these primitives and everyon
32.
by schacon 6mo ago
Ah, I see. You missed the part where that was funny.
33.
by schacon 6mo ago
I would like to take this opportunity to kindly inform you that I wrote that post, as I write all of the blog posts on our blog (and everywhere else I write). You will never see something with my name on it that was written by AI. Thanks.
34.
by schacon 6mo ago
Actually, it is. We're currently leading a conversation among several players in this space to agree on a metadata standard that helps make attaching, collaborating on and transmitting information like this simple, extensible and scala
35.
by schacon 6mo ago
I'm trying not to comment on too many of these, but this one is interestingly wrong to me, so why not indeed? GitButler came about many years ago because I have been using Git for almost the full 20 years of it being around and I thoug
36.
by schacon 6mo ago
Just to clarify (and we do say this when you run `but setup`), the `pre-commit` hook is needed because of the way that we manage commits - we allow for multiple parallel applied branches, which Git cannot do. The way we accomplish this is t
37.
by schacon 6mo ago
Hey, this is Scott - the guy in the photo who wrote this post. AMA.
38.
by schacon 6mo ago
I'm seriously funny...
39.
by schacon 10mo ago
GitButler handles all of this pretty automatically, if you don't want to deal with the Git gymnastics needed here. https://blog.gitbutler.com/stacked-branches-with-gitbutler
40.
Deep dive into the new Cursor Hooks(blog.gitbutler.com)
4 points by schacon 1y ago|0 comments
41.
Building a Responsive Item Counter in CSS Only(blog.gitbutler.com)
3 points by schacon 1y ago|1 comments
42.
by schacon 1y ago
If this is something you're interested in, you may want to try the patch-based review system that we recently launched for GitButler: https://blog.gitbutler.com/gitbutlers-new-patch-based-code-r...
43.
by schacon 1y ago
"One particular aspect that often gets left out of this creation myth, especially by the author of Github is that Mercurial had a prominent role." implies to me that Hg had a role in the creation of Git, which is why I was reactin
44.
by schacon 1y ago
This is all fairly speculative, but I didn't get the impression that Monotone was a main inspiration for Git. I think BitKeeper was, in that it was a tool that Linus actually liked using. Monotone had the content addressable system, wh
45.
by schacon 1y ago
I'm curious why you think hg had a prominent role in this. I mean, it did pop up at almost exactly the same time for exactly the same reasons (BK, kernel drama) but I don't see evidence of Matt's benchmarks or development aff
46.
by schacon 1y ago
Good pull. I was wondering if that was a true statement or not. I am curious if Linus knew about that or made it up independently, or if both came from somewhere else. I really don't know.
47.
by schacon 1y ago
Ah yes. It was pretty cool that when Peepcode was acquired, Pluralsight asked me what I wanted to do with my royalties there and was fine with me waiving them and just open-sourcing the content. It also is a testament to the backwards compa
48.
by schacon 1y ago
You can use smudge and clean filters to expand this into something on disk and then remove it again before the hash computation runs. However, I don't think you would want to use the SHA, since that's somewhat meaningless to read.
49.
by schacon 1y ago
You can probably setup smudge and clean filters in Git to do keyword expansion in a CVS-like way.
50.
by schacon 1y ago
You'll be the first to know when I write it. However, if anything, GitHub sort of killed the mailing list as a generally viable collaboration format outside of very specific use cases, so I'm not sure if I'm the right person
51.
by schacon 2y ago
I think it's more interesting to build tooling that helps with the core problem rather than try to change people's attitudes. The problem imo is not that people are lazy, but that the review tooling is not good at the problem set
52.
by schacon 2y ago
The brand newest version of Git has a new `git backfill` command that may help with this. https://git-scm.com/docs/git-backfill
53.
by schacon 2y ago
If you want us to cover something on Bits and Booze, just let me know! :)
54.
by schacon 2y ago
These days if you do a blobless clone, Git will ask for missing files as it needs them. It's slower, but it's not broken.
55.
by schacon 2y ago
This is fascinating, I didn't know they did this. This is actually not using the built in functionality that Git has, they use a shell script that does basically the same thing rather than just advertising the bundle refs. However, the
56.
by schacon 2y ago
The `--branches` option will work with how git works today. If my patch gets in, future versions of Git will be better with `--all`.
57.
by schacon 2y ago
To try this feature out, you could have the server advertise a bundle ref file made with `git bundle create [bundle-file] --branches` that is hosted on a server within your network - it _should_ make a pretty big difference in local clone t
58.
by schacon 2y ago
You can see basically what part of the communication is by running `git ls-remote` and see how big it is.
59.
by schacon 2y ago
Yeah, it basically has to advertise everything it has, so if you have a lot of references, it can be a quite large exchange before anything is done.
60.
by schacon 2y ago
Damn you! I did find it a little funny that my patch was so small but my commit message was so long. Also, I haven't successfully landed it yet, I keep being too lazy to roll more versions.

More ›