The undo button for @blakeyrat's favorite software
-
Then a car accident, bam, and all my work is lost
I fail to see how pushing helps the real issue behind this, which is "We just lost an employee, oh no, what shall we do?"
Even if your code is all there, if it's partially complete, is it really that simple to just pick it up and run with it? I'd imagine most peoples' unfinished code would be nearly useless without them, whether or not it was actually available. Especially if (as your posts seem to indicate) most of your work and time is spend understanding the system rather than writing code...
-
IntelliJ has GUI support for both interactive rebases and squash merges. You just have to use an IDE that doesn't suck.
And it has changelists, so you can keep all that code seperate without even having to commit it. Of course that still doesn't solve the offsite backup thing, but you can just keep your project on a network drive for that. IntelliJ works fine with those...
-
-
And it has changelists
Which you can even link to issues in your favorite bug tracking software, if you want.
Of course that still doesn't solve the offsite backup thing
Multiple remotes?
-
-
Which you can even link to issues in your favorite bug tracking software, if you want.
Yup. Love that feature.
Multiple remotes?
I think @blakey's head might asplode if he tries that
But yeah, I use several projects on a network drive, and IntelliJ puts up with it fine. Hell, I think VS does too. Granted I haven't tried that with VS in years, and the last time it was kinda buggy, but it seemed to be improving. And that solves the entire problem with no need to worry about using your repo as bus-contingency storage.
No! Stop!!!. There IS a GUI, period.
I'm being quixotic. I'll go find another windmill :)
-
Granted I haven't tried that in years, and the last time it was kinda buggy, but it seemed to be improving.
I've had to do that until last year. Indexing is kinda slow, and IntelliJ complains on startup (warning you that it might be slow and is not officially supported), but it works fine.
-
Yeah. Combined with offline files it works very nicely. I haven't noticed any problems with it.
That statement was about VS though
-
That statement was about VS though
Oh, so VS handles network drives worse than IntelliJ? That's funny :)
offline files
Never got that Windows feature to work correctly.
-
Last I tried, yeah. Of course that was like VS2012, and support seemed to be getting better, so it might be fine now. I think that was Blakey's complaint about using networked drives last time we had this discussion though (CBA to discosearch for it...)
Never got that Windows feature to work correctly.
Huh, really? Never had issues with it personally. Aside from the occasional quirky online-but-not-really-online network drive... And this is with a file server that dropped its network connection every 5 minutes or so and needed a reboot because RAISINS.
-
I remember it reporting "conflicts" all the time although nothing had changed on the server (Windows-only network, no Samba involved). No matter what I tried, it simply didn't work at all.
-
Huh. Strange. I don't actually think I've ever gotten an offline files conflict...
-
What does it matter why? Point is,
Git is ass.I don't understand that different tools are differentHTFY
-
Really, the problem is @blakeyrat's
company istrying to use a DVCS like aCVCSbackup system.Let's remember what he's doing here.
-
I wasn't totally wrong; if he was using a CVCS, then shelvesets would be on the server, which is really what he wants
-
If he was using a particular CVS, you mean.
-
One with shelvesets, yes; IIRC, both TFS and SVN, two of the most used CVCSs, have that feature
-
Oh...didn't realize that was a thing now in svn. We still have an ancient version on the server. I just back up all my source code repose with an rsync script to one of our servers. Takes just a few seconds usually.
-
-
@asdf said:
IntelliJ
Why would a .Net dev use a Java IDE?
Are we talking about the same sort of dev who uses VCS for backups?
-
-
Are we talking about the same sort of dev who uses VCS for backups?
ISTM that's a sufficiently different sort of
to be worth calling out.
-
I'm not gonna give a screenshot of what it actually does after that point because that would actually mess up my stuff, but yeah, that's the GUI.
-
How the fuck is that even remotely similar to what I want to do?
If I was looking for opaque bullshit like that, I could use SourceTree.
-
The cool part is what happens after you start the interactive rebase via that (admittedly not too beautiful) dialog. Because IntelliJ actually guides you through the rebase interactively.
Also, what would you expect from a GUI for that feature?
-
d you expect from a GUI for that feature?
-
That's literally what
git rebase -idoes, minus the drag and drop.
-
Ok; so where's the GUI for it?
Am I speaking Jupiterian or something? Or are you people just retarded? The screenshot sluice cannon posted doesn't even slightly resemble what I need.
-
Ok; so where's the GUI for it?
doesn't exist yet. but you're welcome to build it.
or man up and learn the command line, which would be a good idea anyway because for better or worse (and some days i agree with worse) that's the only officially supported interface to GIT and sometimes it's the only way to perform operation
Xon your repo.
-
Right because Git is a shitty product nobody should be using because it's fucking shitty as shit-ass shit dung.
That's pretty much been my thesis all along.
I'm only using it in the first place because I don't have a choice. And learning the CLI doesn't have anything to do with "man-up", it's more like "give-up" on ever expecting development tools to be less than ass quality.
Well fuck that. I'm not giving up. And when I see shit, I'm calling it out as shit. And if more people did what I'm doing, maybe Git wouldn't be as shitty. (But I doubt it.)
-
Well fuck that. I'm not giving up. And when I see shit, I'm calling it out as shit. And if more people did what I'm doing, maybe Git wouldn't be as shitty. (But I doubt it.)
If more people bitched about software, all that would happen is there's more complaining. It takes people actually writing better software, which you don't seem to have an interest in doing.
-
Right because Git is a shitty product nobody should be using because it's fucking shitty as shit-ass shit dung.
and yet it's what your company uses, so you have the choice of learning it or working at less than full capacity.
I'm only using it in the first place because I don't have a choice.
as i said before, you don't have a choice so you'd be well served learning it.
And learning the CLI doesn't have anything to do with "man-up", it's more like "give-up" on ever expecting development tools to be less than ass quality.
if that's what you want to tell yourself, that's not what it looks like from here. What it looks like from here is someone who's flat our refusing to learn the tool they need to use to do their job and then complaining that none of the "easy" interfaces to that required tool work the way he wants them to and because of that they are all shit.
Well fuck that. I'm not giving up. And when I see shit, I'm calling it out as shit.
good for you. I'll be doing the same thing. Somehow i think we'll both have exactly the same amount of luckAnd if more people did what I'm doing, maybe Git wouldn't be as shitty. (But I doubt it.)
i doubt it, because the more people that complain about it the less people are available or inclined to actually do something to make it better.
-
It takes people actually writing better software, which you don't seem to have an interest in doing.
I have nothing against writing better source control software, I'd gladly work on that.
But, you know, go ahead and make-up stuff about me. Why not. Tell people I'm a 16-foot-tall purple alligator. Morons on this forum'll believe anything you say about me.
-
What it looks like from here is someone who's flat our refusing to learn the tool they need to use to do their job and then complaining that none of the "easy" interfaces to that required tool work the way he wants them to and because of that they are all shit.
Right; so if you get a job at NASA and they want you to learn how to use a slide rule, what do you say? You say "fuck you." Quietly, probably, so you don't lose your job, you just kind of go along with it as best you can.,
Well if I get a C# development job in 2015 and they want me to use a CLI, I said "fuck you."
i doubt it, because the more people that complain about it the less people are available or inclined to actually do something to make it better.
The people who have the ability to make it better are so brain-washed that they think the current version is "complete" and "good". Or they wouldn't have released it as 1.0. It's hopeless.
It's a shitty product, and it'll always be a shitty product.
-
-
Right; so if you get a job at NASA and they want you to learn how to use a slide rule, what do you say?
I say " i work for NASA now? AWESOME! can i use my personal sliderule?"
or more seriously i'd learn the sliderule because it's a job requirement.
Well if I get a C# development job in 2015 and they want me to use a CLI, I said "fuck you."
that is shit and i'm calling it out.
if you say fuck you for having to use the command line as a developer you are not going to have a good time no matter what job you are doing. there's always something that makes you drop down to the command line, at least occasionally.
I'm not saying you should like the command line, or even evangelically promote the CLI, but you should know how to use it and be comfortable with it.
The people who have the ability to make it better are so brain-washed that they think the current version is "complete" and "good". Or they wouldn't have released it as 1.0. It's hopeless.
if they thought git was complete they would have stopped development on it. there's no need to keep developing something that's complete.
It's a shitty product, and it'll always be a shitty product.
Well yes, it'll stay "shit" as you call it for so long as no one steps up and actually participates in making it better. Yelling that something is shit and then saying "but it's not my job to make it better" does nothing but waste hot air.
-
if you say fuck you for having to use the command line as a developer you are not going to have a good time no matter what job you are doing. there's always something that makes you drop down to the command line, at least occasionally.
+1
What's so difficult about using the command line? Seriously! It's actually much simpler than a GUI for many things. Of course you need to be slightly competent in order to be able to use it.
-
Of course you need to be
slightly competentwilling to read documentation and put more than 54 nanoseconds of thought into it in order to be able to use it.FTFY
-
if you say fuck you for having to use the command line as a developer you are not going to have a good time
This is true. Because our industry and all the tools it uses are fucking terrible.
no matter what job you are doing. there's always something that makes you drop down to the command line, at least occasionally.
Correct.
That doesn't mean I want to do it when I don't absolutely have to.
I'm not saying you should like the command line, or even evangelically promote the CLI, but you should know how to use it and be comfortable with it.
THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS COMFORTABLE WITH IT.
-
It demands a large amount of rote memory, something I do not possess
-
There's absolutely no safety features-- a single typo and you can delete tons of work
-
With my lack of rote memory and the trouble I have typing random CLI gibberish due to my dyslexia, I'm practically guaranteed to typo and delete tons of work
LOOK.
Maybe YOU can be comfortable with the CLI. Kudos. You get a fucking cookie. I'm not. I never will be. I'm not even going to fucking try, because I know in advance it'll lead to failure down the road. Nor should I even have to try-- the only reason I'd ever need to use a CLI is if someone else FUCKED UP. (Like, hmm, the people who made Git.)
if they thought git was complete they would have stopped development on it.
If it hit 1.0 without any kind of GUI then they have no fucking clue what they're doing.
Well yes, it'll stay "shit" as you call it for so long as no one steps up and actually participates in making it better.
What would be the point?
The people in charge of releasing Git think it's ok as-is. It's Stockholm Syndrome through and through. Even if I made a patch to add this (which is probably impossible anyway, considering their bizarre obsession with always working offline), what are the odds it would be incorporated? (Hint: zero.)
Yelling that something is shit and then saying "but it's not my job to make it better" does nothing but waste hot air.
It's my hot air to waste.
What's so difficult about using the command line?
YOU are not ME.
For ME it's extremely difficult.
And FUCK YOU if you think my different physical capabilities should disqualify me from the industry of software development. FUCK YOU RIGHT UP THE ASS. <herecomethemodwarnings>
-
-
-
I have nothing against writing better source control software, I'd gladly work on that.
Then why haven't you, instead of bitching for the last 73,000 years?
But, you know, go ahead and make-up stuff about me.
I don't have to. You can say here you'd do it, but you continue not to, so....
-
Right; so if you get a job at NASA and they want you to learn how to use a slide rule, what do you say? You say "fuck you."
If part of the job requires it, for some reason, then you deserve to lose your job for not using it.
-
I'm not going to repeat myself.
The point is, people shouldn't be excluded from software development because their physical capabilities differ from yours. On the contrary, our industry has the potential to be the most inclusive and most accessible in history.
We're just not meeting that potential because there's too many idiots like the people developing Git in charge of things.
-
Then why haven't you, instead of bitching for the last 73,000 years?
What are you offering? My rates are reasonable.
If part of the job requires it, for some reason, then you deserve to lose your job for not using it.
And i'm using Git just fine without using the CLI, People here have told me I "have to" learn the CLI more than any of my bosses at work. So.
-
It demands a large amount of rote memory, something I do not possess
Write that shit down, then, instead of being a crybaby about it. Write GUI tools for your own use that minimize the boilerplate stuff that's the same every time! That's what I do.
-
The point is, people shouldn't be excluded from software development because their physical capabilities differ from yours.
Hell, people who can't do math or even read shouldn't be excluded from writing software either. If nothing else it would give you an endless wellspring of shit to bitch about.
-
-
What are you offering? My rates are reasonable.
I'm offering you the pride of putting one over on the Git devs if you managed to get them to accept a pull request. I don't use Git so I have no reason to pay anyone to improve it.
People here have told me I "have to" learn the CLI more than any of my bosses at work. So.
Not me (generally). But if I were you--and I'm including knowledge about your dyslexia or whatever--I would writing tools even if just for my personal use to make it easier for me to use the CLI if I had to do it.
-
I'm not going to repeat myself.
OK. I don't know where you posted that so.... whatever.
The point is, people shouldn't be excluded from software development because their physical capabilities differ from yours
If you can't comprehend the command line, perhaps the industry really isn't for you. Sorry, but that's just the way our tools work. If you don't want to work to make them "better", and can't stand using the command line, you might want a different field.
-
Sorry, but that's just the way our tools work.
They didn't get bamfed into existence by God.
THEY WORK THAT WAY BECAUSE SOME SHITTY DEVELOPER MADE THEM WORK THAT WAY. Then thought "eh good enough, I'm a total fucking hack."
