develop7

7 ms·

31.
by develop7 7y ago
> Is it just the difficulty? It's loads to unlearn for most of programmers and a perfectly natural knee-jerk reaction of a refusal to. I mean, the more one knows already, the more is the desire to reuse such knowledge. Well, at leas
32.
by develop7 7y ago
Yup, that's basically the story of my 7-ish years with Ruby (well, who am I kidding — it was 90% of Rails). The "easy over simple" is something I was trying to nail, but couldn't; maybe because haven't given it enou
33.
Pijul 0.11(pijul.org)
5 points by develop7 8y ago|1 comments
34.
by develop7 8y ago
> framework — A product with the business logic removed, but all of the assumptions left in. © https://programmingisterrible.com/post/65781074112/devils-di...
35.
Devil's dictionary of programming (2011)(programmingisterrible.com)
3 points by develop7 8y ago|0 comments
36.
by develop7 8y ago
Um, no, you cannot really rewrite so-called "published" history (one with the "public" phase ). Both Git newbies and seasoned users could make use of such concept, should it be ever implemented (it probably wouldn'
37.
by develop7 8y ago
A healthy person's lungs^W Rails.
38.
by develop7 9y ago
Um, that's not quite true: https://www.mercurial-scm.org/doc/evolution/sharing.html#pub... The limits imposed by phase are not going anywhere; you still cannot edit published history.
39.
by develop7 9y ago
> The major deciding point between the two is that Mercurial see history as an immutable truth. That view is quite outdated[1]. It's true for _published_ history though, but that's it. Couldn't help but note Mercurial did
40.
by develop7 9y ago
It's easy to understand, I just don't get why do I need it for anything but Git development. I mean I was perfectly able to be productive with Mercurial without the single shred of knowledge of it's internals. True, I've
41.
by develop7 9y ago
Decided or followed the crowd, absolute most of them probably would defend their choice with teeth and nails (seen that lots of times).
42.
by develop7 9y ago
Mercurial is actually more capable (see "phases" and "changeset evolution"). From the standpoint of the end user, that is.
43.
by develop7 9y ago
All right, I stand corrected; git master of TopIcons Plus actually does work.
44.
by develop7 9y ago
> If you want or need to continue using status icons, you should feel free to use the TopIcons GNOME Shell extension. This will continue to work and the extension offers a better status icon experience than the current default anyway. I&
45.
by develop7 9y ago
Sure, there's C++ here and there underneath, so what?
46.
PVS-Studio Team Willing to Work on Improving Tizen Project (open Letter)(viva64.com)
2 points by develop7 9y ago|0 comments
47.
by develop7 9y ago
In which git is rendered obsolete (pun intended)
48.
Mercurial obsolescence markers exchange support is available on Bitbucket Labs(bitbucket.org)
1 points by develop7 10y ago|0 comments
49.
by develop7 10y ago
Oh, that's why (vanilla) Git can't have nice things like rename/copy tracking, let alone "commit publishedness" flag[1]? 1: https://github.com/peff/git/wiki/SoC-2012-Ideas#published-
50.
by develop7 10y ago
So it makes two of us! I've kickstarted it back in 2011 and it so far it feels like one of the best $20 ever spent.
51.
by develop7 10y ago
Have you tested PragmataPro¹? ¹: http://www.fsd.it/shop/fonts/pragmatapro/
52.
by develop7 10y ago
https://bitbucket.org/facebook/ not for these at least > Not sure if those were committed back. Some were for sure: [1] 1: https://selenic.com/hg/log?rev=fb.com
53.
by develop7 10y ago
That's true in case you've created some changesets, played with them locally and pushed them upstream. But, say you've played with changesets already available upstream, the unmodified changesets do not go away.
54.
by develop7 10y ago
> _it is such a huge success_ GitHub _is_ a huge success, and git is merely comes along in a bandwagon (English isn't my native, hope I've made this clear) > Whereas in mercurial, I feel pretty much lost when I want to do so
55.
by develop7 10y ago
I second using Mercurial as they've also got selective commits in both simpler and more flexible way: https://www.mercurial-scm.org/wiki/CrecordExtension#For_Merc...
56.
by develop7 10y ago
> yet another UI takedown without mention of underlying content-adressable arch I'm wondering how nice architecture under the hood can be an excuse to have an Boeing-747-cockpit-style UI?
57.
by develop7 10y ago
I'm quite certain most of these are sure they are using github and see no difference between it and Git; and "version control" term gives them headaches in same way as "currying" or "first-class function&quot
58.
by develop7 12y ago
Nah, it's not _that_ bad. Only way one may realize Git is hard is to compare it with other DVCSes, so avoiding that makes him confident enough to spread wishful speculations of it's something is wrong with people, not Git.
59.
by develop7 12y ago
> Why shouldn't an engineer be paid? shouldn't he? EDIT: fixed bad wording. sorry, English is not my native. > Please explain to me how they could monetize this on par with the effort put into developing this and still have
60.
by develop7 12y ago
well, all these points valid for all DVCS, not just Git.

More ›