Skip to main content
29 events
when toggle format what by license comment
Apr 12, 2017 at 7:31 history edited CommunityBot
replaced http://programmers.stackexchange.com/ with https://softwareengineering.stackexchange.com/
Feb 10, 2014 at 16:29 history edited Robert Harvey CC BY-SA 3.0
deleted 23 characters in body
Jun 16, 2013 at 16:15 comment added Random42 I really do not see how is git different from other VCS in this situation; what you want is not letting juniors committing/pushing code to the central code repository without review.
Jan 17, 2013 at 19:19 vote accept GlenPeterson
Jan 8, 2013 at 14:23 answer added Erik Reppen timeline score: 2
Jan 8, 2013 at 13:55 comment added Erik Reppen @BrianMarshall I gave up and just use Tortoise for Mercurial as much as possible now. Haven't used Git extensively but I don't recall faceplanting on the same brick walls I've run into with Mercurial at the command line. TBH, I'm no version-control wizard, but the rest of the team seems to have similar issues.
Jan 8, 2013 at 13:38 answer added JeffO timeline score: 8
Jan 8, 2013 at 1:34 history edited GlenPeterson CC BY-SA 3.0
added 229 characters in body
Jan 8, 2013 at 1:20 answer added Yusubov timeline score: -1
Jan 8, 2013 at 1:04 answer added Piotr Rochala timeline score: 8
Jan 8, 2013 at 1:00 comment added user76704 @ErikReppen It's not hard to undo a commit in Git. I'm not sure how Mercurial could solve this in a way that Git can't.
Jan 8, 2013 at 0:50 comment added Erik Reppen Go with Mercurial. Everybody sucks at Mercurial. More seriously, if it's that hard to undo a goof, go with better version control. So yeah, still ripping on Mercurial.
Jan 7, 2013 at 22:42 answer added Karl Bielefeldt timeline score: 52
Jan 7, 2013 at 22:38 answer added gnat timeline score: 5
Jan 7, 2013 at 22:03 history tweeted twitter.com/#!/StackProgrammer/status/288405435877302272
Jan 7, 2013 at 21:52 comment added Steven Evers I believe @mattnz is correct here. This is solely a result of a strong open source influence on git where there is a core dev team that controls the state of the repo, but others are welcome to contribute as well.
Jan 7, 2013 at 21:45 comment added mattnz "Git seems to assume that your only your best (most productive, most experienced) programmers are trusted to check in code" is an incorrect presumption. Git can be configured how you want. The "Pull request" model is just one way - ideally suited to open source projects with a potential large number of unknown contributors. In most commercial environments, the "pull request" model would be a red flag, indicating poor SDLC and QC processes and procedures.
Jan 7, 2013 at 21:24 comment added Alicja Kario @Andrew with git any developer can have his own repo (on his personal computer) and a public personal repo (the one on a server, behind apache) that he can only add changes to. The difference is, that only the lead developers repo is the "blessed one", the one from which everyone should checkout from. The lead checkouts code from developer's public repos and merges them to his public repo. You both have known/controlled iteration as well as source control at all times.
Jan 7, 2013 at 21:24 answer added jgauffin timeline score: 29
Jan 7, 2013 at 21:11 comment added Andrew Sorry, I'm still trying to get my brain around the concept of reviewing uncontrolled (ie non-checked in) code... surely one of the key benefits of using a SCS is that the Review can be made against a known/controlled iteration of the code?
Jan 7, 2013 at 21:10 history edited GlenPeterson CC BY-SA 3.0
added 54 characters in body
Jan 7, 2013 at 21:09 answer added Telastyn timeline score: 40
Jan 7, 2013 at 21:07 answer added Steve timeline score: 0
Jan 7, 2013 at 21:06 answer added Alicja Kario timeline score: 4
Jan 7, 2013 at 20:58 comment added GlenPeterson @TimoGeusch - good point - I've updated my question. In my experience, some people tend to be better at ALL of those things while most other people are worse at ALL of them. Clearly, if someone was really good at reviewing other people's code, but not at writing their own code, this question would answer itself. I don't think I've met one of those people, but I might not have known it if I have.
Jan 7, 2013 at 20:56 history edited GlenPeterson CC BY-SA 3.0
added 270 characters in body
Jan 7, 2013 at 20:51 answer added James timeline score: 0
Jan 7, 2013 at 20:49 comment added Timo Geusch Define "best programmer"? Best at what? Following arbitrary rules? Cranking out code? Writing zero-defect code?
Jan 7, 2013 at 20:40 history asked GlenPeterson CC BY-SA 3.0