←back to thread

Mozilla Firefox – Official GitHub repo

(github.com)
848 points thefilmore | 1 comments | 13 May 25 05:23 UTC | HN request time: 0.364s | source
Show context
bandrami ◴[13 May 25 06:03 UTC] No.43969975[source]▶
Pretty cool that Linus Torvalds invented a completely distributed version control system and 20 years later we all use it to store our code in a single place.
replies(29): >>43969999 #>>43970002 #>>43970008 #>>43970018 #>>43970019 #>>43970028 #>>43970031 #>>43970032 #>>43970036 #>>43970037 #>>43970142 #>>43970154 #>>43970198 #>>43970282 #>>43970314 #>>43970343 #>>43970418 #>>43970419 #>>43970431 #>>43970434 #>>43970451 #>>43970472 #>>43970541 #>>43970904 #>>43971268 #>>43971299 #>>43971387 #>>43971586 #>>43988717 #
ratatoskrt ◴[13 May 25 06:09 UTC] No.43970008[source]▶
To be fair, Git itself is a bit of a pain, and GitHub's main achievement is/was to make it somewhat bearable.
replies(3): >>43970020 #>>43970066 #>>43970187 #
spookie ◴[13 May 25 06:49 UTC] No.43970187[source]▶
To be fair, most of the its difficulty is realized when you're stuck with a teammate rewriting history. Who, much like anyone anyone doing the same, hasn't bothered reading a book explaining things.
replies(3): >>43970280 #>>43970348 #>>43970388 #
baq ◴[13 May 25 07:02 UTC] No.43970280[source]▶
If you don't rewrite history in git, I don't want to bisect in your repos.

If you push rewritten history to master, you're a git.

Conclusion: learn your tools.

replies(2): >>43970414 #>>43988211 #
1. spookie ◴[14 May 25 19:16 UTC] No.43988211[source]▶
Not a single soul besides the one rewriting history knows what they're in for after the fact.

It's a recipe for disaster.

Unless you mean squashing commits, which I don't consider rewriting history, just a retelling of the fact. Still, it's something one can only do very sporadically, or at known periods of time. I

'm sure others would be more pedantic about it and this wasn't clear above.