@dos
I'm very much aware, thanks for git 101 (which I'm not needing, thanks)
I think that how you think about your daily work is sometimes more important than how the software itself works. For git branches, this very much applies.
You seem to disagree, which is fine. But just because the way I usually think about things is different from how things really are, doesn't mean I don't know how things really work.
@b0rk
I'm very much aware, thanks for git 101 (which I'm not needing, thanks)
I think that how you think about your daily work is sometimes more important than how the software itself works. For git branches, this very much applies.
You seem to disagree, which is fine. But just because the way I usually think about things is different from how things really are, doesn't mean I don't know how things really work.
@b0rk
incomplete and there are edge cases where it will fall on its face.
When that happens, I'll remember how things work technically and resolve the situation.
But for everyday work? Nope, not happening.
And yes, I *also* have git repositories with multiple root commits. Doesn't change about how I think about branches.
@b0rk @dos
When that happens, I'll remember how things work technically and resolve the situation.
But for everyday work? Nope, not happening.
And yes, I *also* have git repositories with multiple root commits. Doesn't change about how I think about branches.
@b0rk @dos
@dos
Sigh.
The question is not 'how does git implement branches', it's 'how do you think of branches in git'
My answer is closest to option 1.
I know that's not how git works! But that's fine.
What you don't seem to understand is that it's perfectly possible to have a simplified mental model of how software works, which lets you get on with actual work, without getting confused when the model doesn't match reality, because you're aware that your mental model is @b0rk
Sigh.
The question is not 'how does git implement branches', it's 'how do you think of branches in git'
My answer is closest to option 1.
I know that's not how git works! But that's fine.
What you don't seem to understand is that it's perfectly possible to have a simplified mental model of how software works, which lets you get on with actual work, without getting confused when the model doesn't match reality, because you're aware that your mental model is @b0rk
@dos
So instead, I think of git branches as a set of commits that have a common ancestor with the parent branch, and which can at some point be merged back into the parent branch. That's a much more useful way to think about it, which is supported in all but unusual situations.
When I encounter an edge case in real life, I know about it enough to deal with it. That just doesn't often happen though.
@b0rk
So instead, I think of git branches as a set of commits that have a common ancestor with the parent branch, and which can at some point be merged back into the parent branch. That's a much more useful way to think about it, which is supported in all but unusual situations.
When I encounter an edge case in real life, I know about it enough to deal with it. That just doesn't often happen though.
@b0rk
@dos
Respectfully disagree.
The question was, how do you think about git branches.
I know that the technical implementation of a git branch is just a pointer to a single commit which can move around to other commits, with some overridable safeguards so you don't get too surprised when things are done. However, that's not a very useful way to think about it, IMO.
@b0rk
Respectfully disagree.
The question was, how do you think about git branches.
I know that the technical implementation of a git branch is just a pointer to a single commit which can move around to other commits, with some overridable safeguards so you don't get too surprised when things are done. However, that's not a very useful way to think about it, IMO.
@b0rk
I am now registered for the upcoming European and Belgian elections.
No, I don't live in Belgium anymore. So what? These things still matter.
No, I don't live in Belgium anymore. So what? These things still matter.
@LoganFive
There's a reason why chiropractors make money from mostly 40+ people
There's a reason why chiropractors make money from mostly 40+ people
@liw
"We recognize that a time-sharing system must operate in a hostile environment. We did not attempt to hide the security aspects of the operating system, thereby playing the customary make-believe game in which weaknesses of the system are not discussed no matter how apparent. Rather we advertised the password algorithm and invited attack in the belief that this approach would minimize future trouble. The approach has been successful."
Ken knew about security by obscurity.
"We recognize that a time-sharing system must operate in a hostile environment. We did not attempt to hide the security aspects of the operating system, thereby playing the customary make-believe game in which weaknesses of the system are not discussed no matter how apparent. Rather we advertised the password algorithm and invited attack in the belief that this approach would minimize future trouble. The approach has been successful."
Ken knew about security by obscurity.
@aral
You're not wrong. I'm not saying that Google is a great company, and I'm not saying FOSDEM can't exist without Google. As it stands though, FOSDEM can't exist without cornerstone sponsors, and Google just happens to be the company that wants to be it.
If that means you won't be there, then I respect you for sticking to your principles. Not enough people do that in this world.
But FOSDEM gives its sponsors than do most other sponsored events, is what I wanted to point out
You're not wrong. I'm not saying that Google is a great company, and I'm not saying FOSDEM can't exist without Google. As it stands though, FOSDEM can't exist without cornerstone sponsors, and Google just happens to be the company that wants to be it.
If that means you won't be there, then I respect you for sticking to your principles. Not enough people do that in this world.
But FOSDEM gives its sponsors than do most other sponsored events, is what I wanted to point out
@aral
Why does FOSDEM have cornerstone sponsors? Because not enough people donate to be able to do away with them.
What does Google get for sponsoring? Their name is mentioned on the website, in the closing credits of video recordings, in the opening and closing talks. That's it, nothing more.
Why does FOSDEM have cornerstone sponsors? Because not enough people donate to be able to do away with them.
What does Google get for sponsoring? Their name is mentioned on the website, in the closing credits of video recordings, in the opening and closing talks. That's it, nothing more.
@jpmens
No *checked in* luggage. If you're going somewhere for just a few days, some cabin luggage may suffice, and then you don't need to bother with a large suitcase in the hold?
No *checked in* luggage. If you're going somewhere for just a few days, some cabin luggage may suffice, and then you don't need to bother with a large suitcase in the hold?