Why isn't it working?



  • (The following account is only embellished a little bit)

    Well, I'm bemused...

    Got called into a meeting with one of the project leads and a few other people. I knew it was going to be fun when I realized I was the only real engineer there. Great. What did our resident Mensa member throw me under the bus for today? I wracked my brain trying to remember the last time I spoke to him, which I suppose could have been this morning when he said something about converting network packets to DIS, sending them across the network, then transforming them back. Mostly because I don't know why he needs to do that for his task, and judging by our lead engineer, he didn't know either, but neither of us said anything. Although I may have muttered, 'huh?', under my breath.

    Anyway, back to this meeting.

    "Code...", said my project lead, "we need to find out why it's not working"

    "Why what's not working, boss?", I was a little confused. Lots of stuff might not be working, at least it wasn't about the 'huh'.

    "The IO control application. It's not working. I have a picture I took of the error log on my phone..."

    This wasn't unexpected, he always takes pictures of the screen instead of just emailing the darned file. Sometimes he'll email the picture he took. "Uh... what's it not doing?"

    "We can't launch two systems from the same IO"

    I must have looked puzzled at this point, since he looked a little miffed, "You know, the task your working on?"

    It dawned on me at that point what was going on. "... you mean the one that's not checked in yet?"

    "... it's not?"

    "Well, no, it's shelved, but it's not finished yet so I haven't checked it in. I'm hoping to finish it today if I can figure out the weirdness with the legacy crap that has it's own code path."

    "Oh, well, then, nevermind! Just make sure it works"

    "Don't worry, I'll double check that particular core feature.", I hope I said it it my most re-assuring voice.



  • Is TRWTF not the fact that the monkeys upstairs were looking in the dev servers for completed code? Who let them in?



  • Incidentally, right now your story sounds like you expect clairvoyance from your non-technical colleagues, because you haven't given any details of prior conversations/emails about what you were working on and when it would be completed.

    Without an "I already told him it'd be done in a week", why should he know about it or not?



  • @CaffeinatedNoms said:

    Is TRWTF not the fact that the monkeys upstairs were looking in the dev servers for completed code? Who let them in?

    He was looking at the nightly build for the testers.

    @eViLegion said:

    Incidentally, right now your story sounds like you expect clairvoyance from your non-technical colleagues, because you haven't given any details of prior conversations/emails about what you were working on and when it would be completed.
    Without an "I already told him it'd be done in a week", why should he know about it or not?

    Hmm, good point. Ok, well, considering this took place about 30 minutes after the morning, 'What are you working' on meeting that he attended and stood next to me for, and besides, my JIRA status shows the issue as 'In Progress'... he really shouldn't have expected it to work at this point.



  • @CodeNinja said:

    Hmm, good point. Ok, well, considering this took place about 30 minutes after the morning, 'What are you working' on meeting that he attended and stood next to me for, and besides, my JIRA status shows the issue as 'In Progress'... he really shouldn't have expected it to work at this point.

    Heheh... I've had similar at other jobs though, and it's a pain; you're left with the impression that somehow this is supposed to be "your fault". The other guy clearly just made a massive assumption with no basis in reality whatsoever, but is still angry with you because his brain doesn't work.



    The only saving grace here, is that he didn't then demand for you to "CHECK IT IN AT ONCE!!!" even though it wasn't finished.



  • @CodeNinja said:

    I must have looked puzzled at this point, since he looked a little miffed

    I always look a little miffed.



  • @CodeNinja said:

    my JIRA status shows the issue as 'In Progress'...

    I had a conversation once with a project manager, who TOLD me that I was done with a particular project, because the timeline (that had been worked out months ago) said that I would be done that morning. Without asking me whether, in fact, I was actually done with the work.



  • @DrPepper said:

    @CodeNinja said:
    my JIRA status shows the issue as 'In Progress'...

    I had a conversation once with a project manager, who TOLD me that I was done with a particular project, because the timeline (that had been worked out months ago) said that I would be done that morning. Without asking me whether, in fact, I was actually done with the work.

    And of course you were keeping him apprised of your progress, right? Letting him know it was going to be late?



  • @morbiuswilters said:

    @DrPepper said:
    I had a conversation once with a project manager, who TOLD me that I was done with a particular project, because the timeline (that had been worked out months ago) said that I would be done that morning. Without asking me whether, in fact, I was actually done with the work.

    And of course you were keeping him apprised of your progress, right? Letting him know it was going to be late?

    He didn't say it was late. What's with people on this board and assuming shit.



  • @blakeyrat said:

    @morbiuswilters said:
    @DrPepper said:
    I had a conversation once with a project manager, who TOLD me that I was done with a particular project, because the timeline (that had been worked out months ago) said that I would be done that morning. Without asking me whether, in fact, I was actually done with the work.

    And of course you were keeping him apprised of your progress, right? Letting him know it was going to be late?

    He didn't say it was late. What's with people on this board and assuming shit.

    He said the timeline showed it would be done that morning. DrPepper implied it was not done, which would mean it was late, no?



  • @morbiuswilters said:

    DrPepper implied it was not done,

    When?

    DrPepper just said the boss told him it was done without asking first. There's no implication that it wasn't done.

    And even if there was, I don't read "implications", if DrPepper was trying to communicate "it wasn't done" he should have at some point typed "oh BTW guyz it wasn't done".

    Fuck "implications". You guys seem to think I "imply" things all the time that I didn't say and didn't mean, and it causes me no end of headaches. Either read the words typed on the screen or GTFO.



  • @blakeyrat said:

    DrPepper just said the boss told him it was done without asking first. There's no implication that it wasn't done.

    Why would he be telling the story otherwise? "DrPepper, you're done with that project." "Yep."

    That's not a story you complain about online. That's just "Hey, everything worked as it was supposed to."

    @blakeyrat said:

    And even if there was, I don't read "implications", if DrPepper was trying to communicate "it wasn't done" he should have at some point typed "oh BTW guyz it wasn't done".

    Fuck "implications". You guys seem to think I "imply" things all the time that I didn't say and didn't mean, and it causes me no end of headaches. Either read the words typed on the screen or GTFO.

    Reading implications is just part of communication. Admittedly, it would be nice if he had been more explicit, but the point of his story seemed clear to me.

    Yeah, people make up shit about you, and I guess that's kind of annoying, but I don't consider it a reason to abandon completely logical inferences that come from something someone has written. If someone said "Hey, I was on a plane and they kicked me off for no good reason!" and I was like "Oh, did you complain to customer service? Maybe some consumer website?" and the guy was like "Oh, I didn't have a ticket, lol" then the WTF would be him, not me for reading the implication that he had a goddamn ticket.



  • @blakeyrat said:

    @morbiuswilters said:
    DrPepper implied it was not done,

    When?

    DrPepper just said the boss told him it was done without asking first. There's no implication that it wasn't done.

    And even if there was, I don't read "implications", if DrPepper was trying to communicate "it wasn't done" he should have at some point typed "oh BTW guyz it wasn't done".

    Fuck "implications". You guys seem to think I "imply" things all the time that I didn't say and didn't mean, and it causes me no end of headaches. Either read the words typed on the screen or GTFO.

    Funny, everyone sort of missed the point. I used to work at this place; it sort of goes like this: The project manager and senior devs make a project plan, with limited information about the actual scope of the project. This is waterfall, not agile; so the project manager goes away for a while and works on other stuff while the technical people digest the project and try to get some work done. There is scope creep, and things that were planned on take more time than originally planned. Then later on, the project manager shows up again and tells everyone that they're half-way done, maybe theres a big team lunch or something; then we all go back to work hoping we hit the mark. Then later the project manager comes back again, tells everyone they're done, because it says so on the plan. Everyone scrambles those long horrible hours to get the work actually done; and (you know the rest -- bonuses handed out to the people who didn't actually do any work; sales people are awarded trips to the bahamas; the software engineers gets new tasks handed to them...



    I just think its funny that the PM thinks that Microsoft Project tells him anything real about the status of a project.



  • @morbiuswilters said:

    @blakeyrat said:
    DrPepper just said the boss told him it was done without asking first. There's no implication that it wasn't done.

    Why would he be telling the story otherwise? "DrPepper, you're done with that project." "Yep."

    I don't know why the fuck people do what they do.

    @morbiuswilters said:

    Yeah, people make up shit about you, and I guess that's kind of annoying, but I don't consider it a reason to abandon completely logical inferences that come from something someone has written.

    I don't get how you can reconcile this statement with the fact that you just made up shit about DrPepper.

    @morbiuswilters said:

    "Hey, I was on a plane and they kicked me off for no good reason!" and I was like "Oh, did you complain to customer service? Maybe some consumer website?" and the guy was like "Oh, I didn't have a ticket, lol" then the WTF would be him, not me for reading the implication that he had a goddamn ticket.

    That's a bad example, because not having a ticket is a good reason to kick someone off a plane. The problem isn't your implication; the problem is your friend is a fucking liar.



  • @DrPepper said:

    Funny, everyone sort of missed the point.

    I can't comment on how WTFy the place was, but it seems like if things are going to be late, you inform the PM and the schedule is adjusted (or more people are added, if that's reasonable.)

    And my assumption was that didn't happen here since you never said anything about informing the PM or the PM reacting in some unreasonable way. The deadline came and you had missed it and this was the first the PM heard about it, no?



  • @morbiuswilters said:

    I can't comment on how WTFy the place was, but it seems like if things are going to be late, you inform the PM and the schedule is adjusted (or more people are added, if that's reasonable.)

    That's almost definitely not reasonable. You drop features, is what's reasonable, if having something ready according to the schedule is what's important. Jeez, are you trying to make this worse?

    @morbiuswilters said:

    And my assumption was that didn't happen here since you never said anything about informing the PM or the PM reacting in some unreasonable way. The deadline came and you had missed it and this was the first the PM heard about it, no?

    Yeah, I try to make people aware if I'm going to miss something. But the PM should still be on top of this if he isn't getting information volunteered. Otherwise he's not M'ing the P.



  • @CodeNinja said:

    It dawned on me at that point what was going on. "... you mean the one that's not checked in yet?"

    "... it's not?"

    "Well, no, it's shelved, but it's not finished yet so I haven't checked it in.




    Why do people bother with shelving? It's a terrible approach.



    It's so easy to spin a dev branch for each developer, away from the trunk, away from the CI, and configure the Save button of the IDE to perform a commit in that branch automatically. That way you get the best of all worlds: backup, rollback, electronic trail, and if you die or get fired or have the laptop stolen there is no work lost.



    Even storing the source code in a Dropbox folder is a better approach than shelving. Just like shelving there is no history but at least the company does not have to rely on the developer remembering to shelve stuff.



  • @blakeyrat said:

    I don't get how you can reconcile this statement with the fact that you just made up shit about DrPepper.

    I did no such thing. I inferred a fact, which he has now revealed to be correct. Seriously, you know damn well that there are many inferences made in every single communication with other people. Sometimes the inferences are wrong, but that can be a problem with the speaker communicating imprecisely.

    @blakeyrat said:

    That's a bad example, because not having a ticket is a good reason to kick someone off a plane. The problem isn't your implication; the problem is your friend is a fucking liar.

    Fine:

    Friend: "I went to the doctor today, but they couldn't find my chart!"

    Me: "Oh no, they lost your chart?"

    Friend: "No, I'd never been there before so they did not yet have a chart on me."

    Me: "..."

    And you're telling me the problem in that exchange is that I assumed the speaker wasn't an idiot and that he was telling me a story with an actual point? The mistake is mine for making a completely reasonable inference about the chart when he didn't explicitly state why they couldn't find it?



  • @boomzilla said:

    That's almost definitely not reasonable. You drop features, is what's reasonable, if having something ready according to the schedule is what's important. Jeez, are you trying to make this worse?

    There are plenty of cases where adding people can get things done faster. There are plenty of cases where that will not work.

    @boomzilla said:

    But the PM should still be on top of this if he isn't getting information volunteered.

    I agree that the PM would also be failing there, but I generally don't say "Look at the idiot who can't do his job!" when I'm guilty of the same thing.



  • @morbiuswilters said:

    I did no such thing. I inferred a fact, which he has now revealed to be correct.

    1. There's no difference between "inferring" something unspoken and making shit up. If it's not typed there in black and white, you created it, not the original poster.

    2) DrPepper hasn't confirmed your inference was correct. So you're still making shit up.

    @morbiuswilters said:

    Sometimes the inferences are wrong, but that can be a problem with the speaker communicating imprecisely.

    So it's the speaker's fault if you make shit up and it happens to be incorrect? What the fuck is wrong with you? And it's not just you, it's tons of people on this forum. What the fuck, people?



  • @Ronald said:

    @CodeNinja said:
    It dawned on me at that point what was going on. "... you mean the one that's not checked in yet?"

    "... it's not?"

    "Well, no, it's shelved, but it's not finished yet so I haven't checked it in.

    Why do people bother with shelving? It's a terrible approach.

    Holy crap. I didn't realize that was an actual thing. I just thought it was some internal jargon of CodeNinja's. This is much worse than I'd imagined.



  • @Ronald said:

    @CodeNinja said:
    It dawned on me at that point what was going on. "... you mean the one that's not checked in yet?"

    "... it's not?"

    "Well, no, it's shelved, but it's not finished yet so I haven't checked it in.




    Why do people bother with shelving? It's a terrible approach.



    It's so easy to spin a dev branch for each developer, away from the trunk, away from the CI, and configure the Save button of the IDE to perform a commit in that branch automatically. That way you get the best of all worlds: backup, rollback, electronic trail, and if you die or get fired or have the laptop stolen there is no work lost.



    Even storing the source code in a Dropbox folder is a better approach than shelving. Just like shelving there is no history but at least the company does not have to rely on the developer remembering to shelve stuff.



    I don't really see a problem with shelving, as long as you are careful with it. There's some weird anti-branch thing here, we do make branches, but only for significantly large tasks such as full system replacements. Heck, I don't think I have permission to even create a branch. I will say it's a whole lot better than our old system, which pretty much consisted of 4 security encoded USB drives that you had to sign out and sign in. With the shelving, I just shelve at my desk, walk out to the development hardware, and unshelve there to do testing. The only thing we don't get is the history between shelved versions, but that's not really important IMO.

    Sorry for getting rambly. It's 7pm on a Monday, I've already got 30 hours in this week, and I just ran into a real interesting design flaw with some of our network communications. Apparently no one thought we might want to know where the message was coming from once we received it... so I'm getting huge cross-talk.



  • @boomzilla said:

    @Ronald said:
    @CodeNinja said:
    It dawned on me at that point what was going on. "... you mean the one that's not checked in yet?"

    "... it's not?"

    "Well, no, it's shelved, but it's not finished yet so I haven't checked it in.

    Why do people bother with shelving? It's a terrible approach.

    Holy crap. I didn't realize that was an actual thing. I just thought it was some internal jargon of CodeNinja's. This is much worse than I'd imagined.

    Read the doc and be delighted. Basically shelving means using the version control system without keeping track of versions...


    It's like a shared folder on the network, except that the version control system layer prevents people from using filesystem or file server history features, such as snapshots... And of course a client compatible with the version control system is needed to access the files.



    If you can't think of a single benefit of shelves, it's because there are none. Best case scenario it's a way to work around file sharing restrictions on the network.



  • @morbiuswilters said:

    I can't comment on how WTFy the place was, but it seems like if things are going to be late, you inform the PM and the schedule is adjusted (or more people are added, if that's reasonable.)

    Most PMs, especially the ivory tower types that only look at charts, will fall into the trap of piling on more manpower during a crunch, not knowing that this tends to backfire. Either the deadline is some holy artifact that must be preserved or they panic like a deer caught in the headlights of an advancing truck and their mind locks into a thought pattern of: [i]("More people! Must finish on time!")[/i]

    Just pray you're not the poor sucker that gets to add "guidance for new developer" to their pile of work and then gets held accountable when the assigned work for [i]both[/i] of you ends up even more late than the original ETA.



  • @Ronald said:

    Best case scenario it's a way to work around file sharing restrictions on the network.


    I think that's the only case scenario. I can't imaging using it for anything else. Well, no, that's not exactly true. I shelve everything at night before I log off, instead of checking in and breaking the build. One too many experiences with exploding computers.



  • @Ronald said:

    If you can't think of a single benefit of shelves, it's because there are none. Best case scenario it's a way to work around file sharing restrictions on the network.

    This article might help



  • @CodeNinja said:

    With the shelving, I just shelve at my desk, walk out to the development hardware, and unshelve there to do testing.

    Clearly the dev server is not behind an air gap since you can pull stuff from the version control system. And clearly you have credentials to log on and even deploy stuff on that dev server. Put together, this raises the question: why do you walk there from your workstation? Is Remote Desktop another forbidden technology at your company?



    When you get to a second degree of workaround it's usually time to revisit the root cause.



  • @Ben L. said:

    @Ronald said:
    If you can't think of a single benefit of shelves, it's because there are none. Best case scenario it's a way to work around file sharing restrictions on the network.

    This article might help

    Off-topic but at least you did not quote IKEA.



  • @Ronald said:

    @CodeNinja said:
    With the shelving, I just shelve at my desk, walk out to the development hardware, and unshelve there to do testing.

    Clearly the dev server is not behind an air gap since you can pull stuff from the version control system. And clearly you have credentials to log on and even deploy stuff on that dev server. Put together, this raises the question: why do you walk there from your workstation? Is Remote Desktop another forbidden technology at your company?



    When you get to a second degree of workaround it's usually time to revisit the root cause.




    It's not a Dev Server, it's a Development System. Basically a semi-trailer full of computers and other equipment. I believe this particular one has 32 computers in it. Of course, it can also be hooked to other trailers to extend it's capabilities, which can increase the number of systems quite quickly. We can't remote desktop into it, although we can remote desktop between the computers on-board once we are out there. The only way we can get files too/from it is to either use Perforce or a shared directory on the build server.



  • @blakeyrat said:

    There's no difference between "inferring" something unspoken and making shit up. If it's not typed there in black and white, you created it, not the original poster.

    Man, you must be a real joy to hang out with..

    [Blakey and friend on couch at Blakey's residence]

    Blakey: Would you like a beer?

    Friend: Yeah, that sounds great. [long, awkward period where Blakey makes no motion to get up] Sooo.. I can get it myself.. is the beer in the fridge?

    Blakey: Oh, I don't have any beer. I was just inquiring if you wanted some beer.

    Friend: Oookay.. well, beer does sound good, so I guess I'm going to head down to the convenience store--

    Blakey: No. You can't consume beer in my house. I merely asked if you would like a beer; it was you who inferred that I was offering a beer, or even the opportunity of drinking your own beer. What the fuck is wrong with you?? Why are you putting words in my mouth??

    @blakeyrat said:

    What the fuck is wrong with you? And it's not just you, it's tons of people on this forum. What the fuck, people?

    You're inferring that this forum is made up of multiple people and not just you, me and my thousand sock puppets. Nobody every explicitly stated we're different people, so why are you making assumptions, huh? You're just putting words in our/my mouths/mouth!!



  • @Ragnax said:

    tends to backfire.

    Please link to "Goto considered harmful" because I'm a complete moron and have never heard of that before, either..

    @Ragnax said:

    Just pray you're not the poor sucker that gets to add "guidance for new developer" to their pile of work and then gets held accountable when the assigned work for both of you ends up even more late than the original ETA.

    Yeah, that sucks, but there's an equally odd belief among software engineers I call "The Mythical Mythical Man-Month" (mostly because I'm lazy and lacking in creativity) where they seem to believe that adding more people will never make things go faster. Sometimes adding people slows stuff down, sometimes it gets shit done quicker. In fact, it's not even that hard to tell which: if you look at a project--how far along it is, how inter-connected the remaining pieces are, how flexible the engineers you're thinking of adding are--you can usually estimate whether the new engineers can contribute or whether they'll slow stuff down.



  • @CodeNinja said:

    I shelve everything at night before I log off, instead of checking in and breaking the build.

    You should be developing in your own branch that you can commit to... do people in 2013 really still not check in code because it might "break the build"?



  • @blakeyrat said:

    2) DrPepper hasn't confirmed your inference was correct. So you're still making shit up.

    I forgot to reply to this part. I'll quote DrPepper for you:

    @DrPepper said:

    Then later the project manager comes back again, tells everyone they're done, because it says so on the plan. Everyone scrambles those long horrible hours to get the work actually done...

    I bolded the whole thing since you apparently missed it. I underlined and italicized the important words because I was afraid you might miss those, too.

    Now, I suppose it is possible DrPepper was simply telling this story for no reason and it has no relevance to the project in question which triggered his response in the first place, but if that's the case then I'm going to say the problem is him, not me. Otherwise, he made it pretty clear the PM told him the project was done and he then "scrambled" to get it "actually done". And since it was not "actually done" I'm going to "infer" that it was "late".



  • @CodeNinja said:

    Perforce



  • @morbiuswilters said:

    @CodeNinja said:
    I shelve everything at night before I log off, instead of checking in and breaking the build.

    You should be developing in your own branch that you can commit to... do people in 2013 really still not check in code because it might "break the build"?

    Yep. If I had my own branch I'd check in there, alas I do not and dont have permissions to do so. It would also inconvience the other folks working in the same code. Heck, we had one engineer who refused to do anything but exclusive checkouts, talk about annoying. They promoted him.

    On the plus side, I think I just got it working. Yay. Now about that beer you were ranting about?



  • @CodeNinja said:

    @morbiuswilters said:
    @CodeNinja said:
    I shelve everything at night before I log off, instead of checking in and breaking the build.

    You should be developing in your own branch that you can commit to... do people in 2013 really still not check in code because it might "break the build"?

    Yep. If I had my own branch I'd check in there, alas I do not and dont have permissions to do so. It would also inconvience the other folks working in the same code. Heck, we had one engineer who refused to do anything but exclusive checkouts, talk about annoying. They promoted him.

    On the plus side, I think I just got it working. Yay. Now about that beer you were ranting about?

    Why don't you just commit locally and then push everything once you're done with it?



  • @CodeNinja said:

    Heck, we had one engineer who refused to do anything but exclusive checkouts, talk about annoying. They promoted him.

    Exclusive checkouts are not a blasphemy. They are actually convenient in situations where stuff does not merge well (such as XML files generated by GUIs like Visual Studio or Tibco BW).



  • @Ben L. said:

    Why don't you just commit locally and then push everything once you're done with it?

    1) He's probably not using DCVS.

    2) Because down that road lies madness. If I ever had to use Git again I'd use a series of scripts that automatically do pull-commit-push for me.



  • @Ronald said:

    @CodeNinja said:
    Heck, we had one engineer who refused to do anything but exclusive checkouts, talk about annoying. They promoted him.

    Exclusive checkouts are not a blasphemy. They are actually convenient in situations where stuff does not merge well (such as XML files generated by GUIs like Visual Studio or Tibco BW).

    But "anything but exclusive checkouts" would be a blasphemy.



  • @MiffTheFox said:

    Because down that road lies madness. If I ever had to use Git again I'd use a series of scripts that automatically do pull-commit-push for me.

    Dude, DCVS is so much better than the alternative. It's a tiny bit more leg work but in the long run it saves you from so many of the nightmares of using something like svn or cvs.



  • @Ronald said:

    Exclusive checkouts are not a blasphemy. They are actually convenient in situations where stuff does not merge well (such as XML files generated by GUIs like Visual Studio or Tibco BW).

    That.

    @morbiuswilters said:

    But "anything but exclusive checkouts" would be a blasphemy.

    This.



  • @morbiuswilters said:

    @Ronald said:
    @CodeNinja said:
    Heck, we had one engineer who refused to do anything but exclusive checkouts, talk about annoying. They promoted him.

    Exclusive checkouts are not a blasphemy. They are actually convenient in situations where stuff does not merge well (such as XML files generated by GUIs like Visual Studio or Tibco BW).

    But "anything but exclusive checkouts" would be a blasphemy.

    Unfortunately most version control systems don't offer a very granular configuration when it comes to exclusive/non-exclusive checkouts. Usually it's at the repository level.



    It's like choosing which side of the road people must drive. You could say trucks on right and cars on left, but that works well only on one-ways. Sometimes you have to pick the lesser of two evils even if it leads to having a developer or two with their panties in a bunch.



  • @morbiuswilters said:

    @MiffTheFox said:
    Because down that road lies madness. If I ever had to use Git again I'd use a series of scripts that automatically do pull-commit-push for me.

    Dude, DCVS is so much better than the alternative. It's a tiny bit more leg work but in the long run it saves you from so many of the nightmares of using something like svn or cvs.

    It could cause the second coming of Jesus and disarm all nuclear powers, but if Git is the front-end to it, it's bullshit as far as I'm concerned.



  • @blakeyrat said:

    It could cause the second coming of Jesus and disarm all other nuclear powers.

    FTFY. Also: God Bless America.



  • @blakeyrat said:

    It could cause the second coming of Jesus and disarm all nuclear powers, but if Git is the front-end to it, it's bullshit as far as I'm concerned.

    I don't know any VCS with a decent UI. In that regard, git's about on-part with svn or cvs.



  • @Ronald said:

    Also: God Bless America.

    He's working on it, but we're a fat fucking nation. If some people laid off the fried chicken, it might make the blessing go a little faster.

    Also, blessing of Dearborn has been outsourced to Allah. And Ganesh currently has several beachheads across the country. Both of those are going well, but we're about out of Beard Conditioner for Allah.



  • @morbiuswilters said:

    If some people laid off the fried chicken
     

    The fried chicken is probably unionized.



  • @dhromed said:

    @morbiuswilters said:

    If some people laid off the fried chicken

    The fried chicken is probably unionized.

    NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!



  • @morbiuswilters said:

    @blakeyrat said:
    It could cause the second coming of Jesus and disarm all nuclear powers, but if Git is the front-end to it, it's bullshit as far as I'm concerned.

    I don't know any VCS with a decent UI. In that regard, git's about on-part with svn or cvs.

    TortoiseSVN is pretty good. I use VisualSVN too for Visual Studio.



  • @morbiuswilters said:

    I bolded the whole thing since you apparently missed it. I underlined and italicized the important words because I was afraid you might miss those, too.

    You know, adding emphasis is just another phrase that means making shit up, right?















    UNLESS YOU'RE READING OUR MINDS


Log in to reply
 

Looks like your connection to What the Daily WTF? was lost, please wait while we try to reconnect.