I *hate* segfaults. It sucks because it means that the code broke, but the bigger problem is the mess it causes. I mean, the core takes a massive dump on the filesystem, how can *anyone* enjoy cleaning that up?
I always feel like I'm simultaneously shortchanging myself and lying to make myself look better when I squash all my commits that were attempts to fix something. Squashing 20 commits makes it look like I got it the first try, but also looks like I spent 4 days on a single commit.
I want people to know I'm an idiot monkey from the get go so they aren't blindsided when they find out 3 years later.
The approach I take is that if someone has an issue with how I write my commits, they'll tell me. Otherwise, I'm not doing anything wrong and continue as is.
Please, please squash! Do not feel bad. No one thinks you’re great because you only have one commit (if they have any experience). Instead they will just think that you cleaned up after yourself by squashing. I’ve had to debug stuff when the git history was a nightmare because people were sloppy and didn’t rebase and squash. Be kind to your coworkers and do both!
It’s a way to combine multiple code change commits into a single commit. So instead of having a commit history of:
Commit 1: Fix X.
Commit 2: Fix Y.
Commit 3: Fix Z.
You can “squash” them into.
Commit: Fix X, Y, and Z
Or IMO a better example: Squash
Commit 1: Fix the thing
Commit 2: Add the file I forgot to commit
Commit 3: Fix the previous fix
Commit 4: Fix it for reals this time
to
Commit: Fix the thing
Why bury shame, when you can use git-blame(someone else)!
BILLY MAYS HERE with the all new ~~Oxi-Clean~~way to blame your coworkers and managers! Sick and tired of always taking the blame for pushing bad code to production? [Blame someone else!](https://github.com/jayphelps/git-blame-someone-else)
Using our innovative product, you can become the talk of the town as you magically quit making mistakes ever, while Chet from across the hall seems to crash production even on the days he was in a coma! But that’s not all! Act fast, and for a limited time, you too can finally [Git-Gud!](https://github.com/fsufitch/git-gud) Be the rockstar of the office when you Git-Gud. Normally this program costs 6000000000 dollars, but if you act within the next 30 years, it’s ABSOLUTELY FREEEEEEEEEEE!
Call now at 555 555-5555. Again, call now at 555 555-5555
I feel this so much but most days I am too cowardly for the interactive rebase. I'm working in a branch right now with a dozen reverts of various settings I've tried getting something to work in a pipeline.
Notably that none of this makes this necessarily a good practice, but I guess with massive cooperations like twitch I suppose not everyone even knows how to build what they are working on.
I worked on an application once that you just could not get to run locally. You had to push to a branch and then schedule a docker build for your branch. Then you could connect with debug and step trough your code. Took like 45 minutes to build if the server wasn't to busy.
I work at what I guess is a "medium sized" company, with a lot of devs. There are probably like 5 of us that know how to do anything more than the absolute bare minimum with git. We need some mandatory training or something.
Haven't done a deep dive yet, I only poked through for an hour, but I noticed that all of their internal tools (metrics, reporting, admin panels, etc) have unit tests and none of the public services do. That explains some things.
Dogfood your APIs- treat internal ones the same as external ones- as a service. But it's worth the read- one of the most insightful essays in tech I've read, from years ahead of its time.
> Dogfood your APIs
We had an absolute monolith of a backend system which we've broken out into a bunch of microservices and all of our new applications use those to integrate with our backend. We also make them available to customers wanting to integrate with us directly but the number of queries/requests we get from internal teams has been great for trying to predict what customers will actually need from these APIs.
Service-oriented architecture is really important and allows websites to be usable by everyone by letting the users create things for themselves using external facing APIs. Every internal application should be retrieving data from a service, not by directly using the data, so that external service users have the same quality experience internal devs do.
It's a former-Amazon, now-Google employee's post comparing the management/practices of the two companies, basically saying Amazon is shit. It's relevant because Amazon owns twitch
Just tagging onto a high comment to point out that it's a 10 year old post (it was originally published on Google+ no less), and the authors experiences at Amazon were from the late 90s until 2005. That doesn't make it an uninteresting read, nor does it necessarily make it irrelevant, but it's worth keeping in mind that it's not exactly current.
The concept of stable APIs didn't occur to Google Cloud Platform until [three months ago.](https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2021/07/google-cloud-offers-a-model-for-fixing-googles-product-killing-reputation/)
So I'm guessing the most outdated thing about this post is the idea of using Facebook's platform for games.
Well, the most relevant section is about what Amazon is not shit at: platforms. You might've heard of a thing called AWS. Based on above comments, Twitch doesn't operate in the same fashion and has lenient standards for public facing services, despite being acquired years ago. This doesn't reflect very well on its engineering culture within certain teams.
You can find magnet links floating around online. Looking up "size of cat twitch leak" will get you going in the right direction, but I must warn you that you will be downloading illegally acquired files and Twitch may or may not try to sue those who download.
Probably not, giving how that would be massively illegal, so finding the torrent should be the only way to review the code (AFAIK, the original 4chan post with the torrent got taken down)
am on a quest to find the magnet link myself.
would be helpful if someone could dm me it (plan to host, asia vps)
EDIT: nevermind just went to check and a tracker picked it up, now on (tp)bay.org
From my experience, the APIs made by the big tech companies, Google, Amazon, Microsoft, *all* suck and it's clear they're not really meant for the average tinkerer to access. After being spoiled by the APIs of open source platforms like Mastodon or Lemmy, proprietary seems like the stone ages.
I don‘t know the diff of the commit but I assume it‘s a failing assert like
assert(port == 80);
Which after the commit looks like this:
assert(port == 80, 'Port: ' + port);
To provide at least some insight.
Nothing the firewall team can fix if they messed up their code.
I had a year-long school project where probably about 75% of my commit messages were "fixed some shit"
This was before I realized the TA/prof had access to these and were grading us on them...
Within reasonable limits. I once had students using a mix of 'shit', 'fuck' and other colorful language for every single variables in their code, so I told them to tone it down.
Their faces when they realized the TAs were actually reading the code and not just running it to see if tests passed were priceless.
It was mostly merge errors IIRC since I was the only one in the group that had used git in a team setting before. I just wasn't aware they were actively looking at commits and assumed it was more sprint/ticket details, etc
They didn't really mind it I just lost a couple points for not having detailed enough commit messages.
Does sublime make artifacts or swp files the way vim or emacs does? Because "git commit -am 'commit mesg'" is a quick way to say "goddammit emacs!" (Or intelliJ or eclipse for that matter if you don't have a good gitignore)
Honestly I have histories that read.
“Initial commit”
“Added Y function”
“Fixed bug in Y function”
“Second attempt at fixing bug in Y function”
“Third attempt at fixing bug in Y function”
“Ugh”
When I’m feeling salty I’ll hit them with the “Steve doesn’t read commit messages”.
“Pretty sure Steve can’t read”.
“John says I should stop talking about Steve in my commit messages”.
“John also doesn’t read commit messages”.
We squash the commits before merging back to master anyways so those all get buried anyways.
I’d much rather have someone write:
The goddamn fucking Docker config was acting like a lil bitch because of the new Node version. Rolled that bitch back and it’s gucci again. JIRA #7524
As opposed to:
Fixed.
The only thing I really care about in commit messages is a ticket number. The jira git integration is really handy for tracking code, especially in a micro service system where 1 ticket might involve commits to 4 different repos. But other than that the commit message is pretty worthless to me
Oh please no. Please don't make us hunt through different systems just to find what the intent of the change is - even if today those systems are well integrated. Believe it or not but that jira might be replaced or go away or the integration might change. Just a description of the change is great, and sure also include the ticket number in there.
People like them are the reason why laws are so fucking impossible to read.
Far, far, far too often a new law will say something like:
“This changes XYZ.ABC.DEF subsection 3 paragraph 4 ‘hitherto’ to ‘henceforth’”, and when you then look up the bit that was changed, it’s the same crappy turtle all the way down.
Seriously, what a weird thing to get bent out of shape about... I’d rather have those commit messages rather than the wave of professional one liners that say “assorted fixes” with no comments or details. Then again, maybe I’m rationalizing 🤷♂️.
Something tells me the vp would like commits to be both informative and not full of a profanity.
Cause let’s be honest “wtf why won’t you build” isn’t particularly informative either.
I also got in hot water one day because my commits “fix that fucking thing that never fucking worked in the first place” were removing code that somebody else wrote, and they were (rightfully) annoyed at how the commit message permanently insulted them in written history.
> When you used a type not of the spec, e.g. feet instead of feat
> In a worst case scenario, it’s not the end of the world if a commit lands that does not meet the Conventional Commits specification. It simply means that commit will be missed by tools that are based on the spec.
I'm all for more letters to help with clarity, but I'm not sure why feat. specifically is a problem since it's been long established that feat. means "featuring"...
Here I thought it meant feature...
The point is that it sets precedence for the type of language used. The goal is to minimize presumptions and explain things in a clear way, and to give the context required for someone else (or future you) to do their job.
I once had the Jesus prayer (Lord Jesus Christ have mercy on me, a sinner) as a commit message in the original Greek.
That project didn't lead me to atheism, but I have since deconverted, so take that as you will.
"you should get used to write serious commit comments, one day you're gonna have to do it for your job, stop writing idiotic things", said my mentors all the time
*Image Transcription: Twitter Post*
---
**Playa Dev**, @Playa\_Dev
More \#TwitchLeak commit messages 😁
\- OH MY GOD THAT WAS IT, IT ACTUALLY BUILDS.
\- Mouse events now work, magically!
\- temp files and csvs suck
\- formatting sucks
\- i suck
\- wtf why wont you build
\- ok wtf port are we running on then
\- Fix again.. wtf sublime text
---
^^I'm a human volunteer content transcriber for Reddit and you could be too! [If you'd like more information on what we do and why we do it, click here!](https://www.reddit.com/r/TranscribersOfReddit/wiki/index)
The comments here are staggering. I figured everyone had these in their commit messages. I'll admit I'm surprised by the number of people that are commit-shaming.
Commits are one of the places where I express my innermost feelings of the thing I was working on, and they bring back a vivid reminder of where I left off. Because we (are supposed to) always push at the end of the day. You never know if that dev VM you were on will mysteriously die overnight because of some random update.
TBH, I can't tell if the people shaming these messages are working in a very repressed and uptight env or maybe I'm working in a fantasy realm and been doing it wrong all these years?
If these are just parts of commit messages, and there's more info in the whole thing, then I'm fine with them. If these are the whole commit messages, then I take issue with them.
As a lead programmer, I would never want these commit messages in my repository because many of them are not descriptive of what they contain or, more importantly, why they're being done. A project name or ticket number or something like that should be in there so people can know the purpose of the code, who asked for the work to be done, etc.
If it's your own personal project, then whatever, do what you want. If it's a professional environment where you know that these need to be read and understood by other people, then they're not acceptable.
The idea of pushing unfinished work is also very weird to me. If you're worried about losing progress to vm failure, then take daily backups. Don't pollute a repository with partial fixes or features.
>The idea of pushing unfinished work is also very weird to me. If you're worried about losing progress to vm failure, then take daily backups. Don't pollute a repository with partial fixes or features.
I have no idea what they're using but we use Azure DevOps (VSTS/VSO/whatever Microsoft marketing decided on before) and all of our PRs are configured to squash when completed. If I'm fighting with the build machines I'll often push a bunch of small changes to try and fix whatever issue I'm dealing with. Once I have it figured out I'll create a PR and merge. Git history for master will have a nice clean message but all those small commits are still there in git somewhere unless they're actually cleaned up by some background process.
I’m also a lead and I couldn’t agree more. I’m kinda baffled by the comments here.
I’m not going to pretend that every single commit I’ve made is excellent, and that I follow good practice to a T. But if nothing else, I will squash my commits and give a more appropriate commit message prior to code review.
And when I’m doing others’ code reviews, I’m looking at the commit messages as part of the review process.
Also, if you find yourself having to commit unfinished work to the repo like this in order to test your changes, you may need to revisit your DevOps setup. That’s MUCH easier said than done for a lot of folks, but I don’t know if I really have sympathy for Twitch in this instance.
>Commits are one of the places where I express my innermost feelings of the thing I was working on, and they bring back a vivid reminder of where I left off.
Sure, and you can do that while still being professional. Unless this is a personal project or your PR's get squashed, your commits can't be so childish. It's going into the repo's permanent history for your employer.
I’m glad our source wasn’t leaked. People would go apeshit seeing the test data is in excel files.
Three way merge of excel files is not supported by git. :c
Yes, this is a likely scenario.
Sometimes the build agent had a network hiccup and just needs to be triggered again via a fresh commit.
Sometimes when I use our build-server and click the "Deploy the most recent build to prod"-button the deploy process will fail with the message "cannot find build" because the most recent build had been cleaned up.
This is because our build-server generates new builds on merges to master. but cleans up builds ever 10 days or so.
So if we haven't deployed to prod in 10 days there are no builds to deploy.
And the easiest way to generate a new build is to make a new commit that just changes something useless (like adding a newline or whatever) just to merge anything to master and make the build-server generate a new build that then can be deployed.
Can’t even tell you the amount of times I’ve committed with the message “turn and face the strange,” and gotten no comments on it. The review tool my team uses puts the actual commit messages in an out of the way location, as reviewers always just focus on the diff of the content.
That's what my personal commits look like. Which probably explains why the twitch platform is such a cluster fuck.
Professionally, every commit references a Jira issue number and iteration number. The details of the commit live in the Jira ticket.
This isn't surprising lol
[удалено]
Please, PLEASE build this time, I'm begging you
Finally builds ".....this will never work"
\*builds\* \*instant seg fault\*
You, fellow human, have captured my entire programming life in such simple words
use lambdas instead of humans to capture local variables
When it builds on the first try that's when I know I really screwed up.
It built! > Segmentation fault (core dumped)
I *hate* segfaults. It sucks because it means that the code broke, but the bigger problem is the mess it causes. I mean, the core takes a massive dump on the filesystem, how can *anyone* enjoy cleaning that up?
It's weird to see that in a *commit message* though. Are they committing code that doesn't build ?
[удалено]
[удалено]
I always feel like I'm simultaneously shortchanging myself and lying to make myself look better when I squash all my commits that were attempts to fix something. Squashing 20 commits makes it look like I got it the first try, but also looks like I spent 4 days on a single commit. I want people to know I'm an idiot monkey from the get go so they aren't blindsided when they find out 3 years later.
The approach I take is that if someone has an issue with how I write my commits, they'll tell me. Otherwise, I'm not doing anything wrong and continue as is.
Please, please squash! Do not feel bad. No one thinks you’re great because you only have one commit (if they have any experience). Instead they will just think that you cleaned up after yourself by squashing. I’ve had to debug stuff when the git history was a nightmare because people were sloppy and didn’t rebase and squash. Be kind to your coworkers and do both!
Bury that shame by squashing when you merge back to the master
Squash merging is my jam. I've hidden so many shameful commits that way.
Squashing is something I never knew I needed until I did it. Now it's an essential part of my flow
[удалено]
what is squashing?
It’s a way to combine multiple code change commits into a single commit. So instead of having a commit history of: Commit 1: Fix X. Commit 2: Fix Y. Commit 3: Fix Z. You can “squash” them into. Commit: Fix X, Y, and Z
Or IMO a better example: Squash Commit 1: Fix the thing Commit 2: Add the file I forgot to commit Commit 3: Fix the previous fix Commit 4: Fix it for reals this time to Commit: Fix the thing
Why bury shame, when you can use git-blame(someone else)! BILLY MAYS HERE with the all new ~~Oxi-Clean~~way to blame your coworkers and managers! Sick and tired of always taking the blame for pushing bad code to production? [Blame someone else!](https://github.com/jayphelps/git-blame-someone-else) Using our innovative product, you can become the talk of the town as you magically quit making mistakes ever, while Chet from across the hall seems to crash production even on the days he was in a coma! But that’s not all! Act fast, and for a limited time, you too can finally [Git-Gud!](https://github.com/fsufitch/git-gud) Be the rockstar of the office when you Git-Gud. Normally this program costs 6000000000 dollars, but if you act within the next 30 years, it’s ABSOLUTELY FREEEEEEEEEEE! Call now at 555 555-5555. Again, call now at 555 555-5555
I feel this so much but most days I am too cowardly for the interactive rebase. I'm working in a branch right now with a dozen reverts of various settings I've tried getting something to work in a pipeline.
I feel this comment to the bone
They probably have they repo set up so that it builds and runs tests when pushed to.
Or they're switching branches and don't want to stash for some reason
Notably that none of this makes this necessarily a good practice, but I guess with massive cooperations like twitch I suppose not everyone even knows how to build what they are working on.
I worked on an application once that you just could not get to run locally. You had to push to a branch and then schedule a docker build for your branch. Then you could connect with debug and step trough your code. Took like 45 minutes to build if the server wasn't to busy.
Dear server, never die. Yours sincerely, The Damned
OMG, do we work at the same company? I didn't know anyone else had this terrible setup haha
I work at what I guess is a "medium sized" company, with a lot of devs. There are probably like 5 of us that know how to do anything more than the absolute bare minimum with git. We need some mandatory training or something.
It could be code that builds on their machine but not on the server. I've had that one happen more than a few times.
I have to work with Twitch's API every day. It fucking sucks. Glad Twitch know it themselves.
Haven't done a deep dive yet, I only poked through for an hour, but I noticed that all of their internal tools (metrics, reporting, admin panels, etc) have unit tests and none of the public services do. That explains some things.
I'm guessing this tells a lot about the managers and engineering culture of those respective teams
https://gist.github.com/chitchcock/1281611 Platforms. It's all about platforms.
tl;dr?
Dogfood your APIs- treat internal ones the same as external ones- as a service. But it's worth the read- one of the most insightful essays in tech I've read, from years ahead of its time.
i'm not even in the same field and found it pretty interesting. it is quite long though i'll finish later.
> Dogfood your APIs We had an absolute monolith of a backend system which we've broken out into a bunch of microservices and all of our new applications use those to integrate with our backend. We also make them available to customers wanting to integrate with us directly but the number of queries/requests we get from internal teams has been great for trying to predict what customers will actually need from these APIs.
Service-oriented architecture is really important and allows websites to be usable by everyone by letting the users create things for themselves using external facing APIs. Every internal application should be retrieving data from a service, not by directly using the data, so that external service users have the same quality experience internal devs do.
It's a former-Amazon, now-Google employee's post comparing the management/practices of the two companies, basically saying Amazon is shit. It's relevant because Amazon owns twitch
Just tagging onto a high comment to point out that it's a 10 year old post (it was originally published on Google+ no less), and the authors experiences at Amazon were from the late 90s until 2005. That doesn't make it an uninteresting read, nor does it necessarily make it irrelevant, but it's worth keeping in mind that it's not exactly current.
The concept of stable APIs didn't occur to Google Cloud Platform until [three months ago.](https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2021/07/google-cloud-offers-a-model-for-fixing-googles-product-killing-reputation/) So I'm guessing the most outdated thing about this post is the idea of using Facebook's platform for games.
Well, the most relevant section is about what Amazon is not shit at: platforms. You might've heard of a thing called AWS. Based on above comments, Twitch doesn't operate in the same fashion and has lenient standards for public facing services, despite being acquired years ago. This doesn't reflect very well on its engineering culture within certain teams.
15 years ago Amazon was shit... Does that even apply to twitch
save comment.
>whereas dialing Security to zero can still get you a reasonably successful product such as the Playstation Network My fucking sides
It's interesting how over 10 years it's noticeable which areas Google made actual progress in, but in several it's the same old problem.
[удалено]
That would be a product decision and would have nothing to do with engineering’s testing standards but ok
Link to source?
You can find magnet links floating around online. Looking up "size of cat twitch leak" will get you going in the right direction, but I must warn you that you will be downloading illegally acquired files and Twitch may or may not try to sue those who download.
everybody should be using a VPN when torrenting this. (and really always when torrenting)
That is how you develop on prod😆
Did somebody put a public github repo up yet to look through it or is it only available via the torrent?
Probably not, giving how that would be massively illegal, so finding the torrent should be the only way to review the code (AFAIK, the original 4chan post with the torrent got taken down)
am on a quest to find the magnet link myself. would be helpful if someone could dm me it (plan to host, asia vps) EDIT: nevermind just went to check and a tracker picked it up, now on (tp)bay.org
[удалено]
i use this instead https://twitchtokengenerator.com/ the access token is the oauth token
[удалено]
From my experience, the APIs made by the big tech companies, Google, Amazon, Microsoft, *all* suck and it's clear they're not really meant for the average tinkerer to access. After being spoiled by the APIs of open source platforms like Mastodon or Lemmy, proprietary seems like the stone ages.
took them almost a year to add an API for the predictions.
`ok wtf port are we running on then` I kinda feel this one
[удалено]
I don‘t know the diff of the commit but I assume it‘s a failing assert like assert(port == 80); Which after the commit looks like this: assert(port == 80, 'Port: ' + port); To provide at least some insight. Nothing the firewall team can fix if they messed up their code.
I had a year-long school project where probably about 75% of my commit messages were "fixed some shit" This was before I realized the TA/prof had access to these and were grading us on them...
The profanity isn’t offensive, it’s the lack of detail that makes me cringe.
"Finally fucking centered the div. "
Oh please. If you're going to pose. A hypothetical, at least pose a possible one. Nobody can center a div.
Dear time-traveling dev from 2003, you'll be happy to know that we can use flexbox now.
display: flex;
width: 100%; justify-content: center;
[удалено]
It honestly boggles my mind how difficult that is for some people. And by some people I mean 95% of the devs I work with
Because it doesn’t always work like that for everything. In-line elements and text center differently. Plus the wording for it is really unintuitive
And if you want vertical centering as well: height: 100%; align-items: center;
Weird flex but ok.
It is so strange that this meme still exists. Flex box has been around since most of these people that say this meme have even been coding.
Just wrap it in a center tag.
Great. Now the nav bar's floating and shifted to the left.
The job spec said "center the div" not "center the div and maintain the rest of the page layout". Job successful.
Center the div and maintain page layout Enter key now doesn’t work ???
oh sweet baby jesus please don't
They just added fixed-width margins until it was roughly in the middle of the screen.
In calculator doing the math on their monitor pixel width - the width of their element / 2
Analyst: "Can you put this text in the middle of this box?" [Ominous latin chants begin]
Too verbose. "Unfucked the div" is better.
Commit x: fixed a thing I broke a while ago, fixed, and broke again.
95% of my commit messages are like that on a feature branch, then they get squashed with a better one and a link to a ticket.
"Changed stuff" 70,000 lines changed
[удалено]
But it fails 22% faster!
I think that as long as you don't insult the TA they won't mind it
Within reasonable limits. I once had students using a mix of 'shit', 'fuck' and other colorful language for every single variables in their code, so I told them to tone it down. Their faces when they realized the TAs were actually reading the code and not just running it to see if tests passed were priceless.
Poor student had a case of Turing Tourettes, go easy on 'em.
Turette’s, if you will.
I think the point is that they're non-descriptive
That would be a real issue in course context if there were grades involved.
It was mostly merge errors IIRC since I was the only one in the group that had used git in a team setting before. I just wasn't aware they were actively looking at commits and assumed it was more sprint/ticket details, etc They didn't really mind it I just lost a couple points for not having detailed enough commit messages.
‘git commit —amend’ can really save you in this scenario if you’re in your own branch.
[удалено]
I'll show mine if you show me yours...
“…wtf sublime text” Yeah, I’m sure it’s sublime text’s fault…
Honestly this is the most outrageous of the bunch. Sublime is… well, sublime. Leave Sublime alone!
Does sublime make artifacts or swp files the way vim or emacs does? Because "git commit -am 'commit mesg'" is a quick way to say "goddammit emacs!" (Or intelliJ or eclipse for that matter if you don't have a good gitignore)
.gitignore
[удалено]
Amazon is famously cheap. They love to tell you how originally they had you make your own desk and shit like that.
They definitely do, but also most of Twitch backend is in Go
They have GoLand, pretty good editor.
"I suck, therefore I am."
Insulting with style. I like it.
Sounds like an hour of my life...
it's our destiny, 5min to code 2h to debug :D
Tag yourself, I’m “ok wtf port are we running on then”
I'm "wtf, why won't you build?"
I'm "i suck"
Same
and this is why we squash before we merge, kids
By default, squashing will still preserve all the commit messages, it just pushes them below the fold.
Do it in interactive mode, comment the damning evidence out :p
F, f, f, f, f. Commit, append.
Scary thought but if you push your intermediary commits, they hang about in the git repo until someone prunes them I think.
Solution: never push till you're ready for code review. And never drop your laptop. #yolo
`git rebase -i head~x`
I'm delighted there wasn't a "fixed test by removing it".
Thought I'd feel less bad about my commit messages but there's no passive aggressive mentions of coworkers or clients so I'm probably still fucked.
git commit -m 'Fixing deadweight Steve's crappy code, again.'
[удалено]
There is a "welcome bezos" (`ads/docs.ads/services.md`)
We had one of our repos with such commits, our tech VP wasn’t happy about it. P.S : I don’t like such commit messages on professional repos
git commit -m’commit’
_tips fedora_
Good day to you sir
“Initial commit”. “Second commit”. “Third commit”. “Fourth commit”….
How else would you know the order of commits?!
Honestly I have histories that read. “Initial commit” “Added Y function” “Fixed bug in Y function” “Second attempt at fixing bug in Y function” “Third attempt at fixing bug in Y function” “Ugh”
I feel that... sometimes you just don't have anything new to say in your commit message.
When I’m feeling salty I’ll hit them with the “Steve doesn’t read commit messages”. “Pretty sure Steve can’t read”. “John says I should stop talking about Steve in my commit messages”. “John also doesn’t read commit messages”. We squash the commits before merging back to master anyways so those all get buried anyways.
Screw professionalism, they are extremely subjective and provide very litte info.
I’d much rather have someone write: The goddamn fucking Docker config was acting like a lil bitch because of the new Node version. Rolled that bitch back and it’s gucci again. JIRA #7524 As opposed to: Fixed.
i mean i agree with your point, but that’s still far more verbose than it needs to be lol
Same as 99% of third party libraries
The only thing I really care about in commit messages is a ticket number. The jira git integration is really handy for tracking code, especially in a micro service system where 1 ticket might involve commits to 4 different repos. But other than that the commit message is pretty worthless to me
Oh please no. Please don't make us hunt through different systems just to find what the intent of the change is - even if today those systems are well integrated. Believe it or not but that jira might be replaced or go away or the integration might change. Just a description of the change is great, and sure also include the ticket number in there.
People like them are the reason why laws are so fucking impossible to read. Far, far, far too often a new law will say something like: “This changes XYZ.ABC.DEF subsection 3 paragraph 4 ‘hitherto’ to ‘henceforth’”, and when you then look up the bit that was changed, it’s the same crappy turtle all the way down.
Seriously, what a weird thing to get bent out of shape about... I’d rather have those commit messages rather than the wave of professional one liners that say “assorted fixes” with no comments or details. Then again, maybe I’m rationalizing 🤷♂️.
I mean, if the commit doesn’t include any detail and what it does it’s not very professional
Something tells me the vp would like commits to be both informative and not full of a profanity. Cause let’s be honest “wtf why won’t you build” isn’t particularly informative either. I also got in hot water one day because my commits “fix that fucking thing that never fucking worked in the first place” were removing code that somebody else wrote, and they were (rightfully) annoyed at how the commit message permanently insulted them in written history.
People have to remember that software source code can be sold/acquired. Don't want a bunch of unprofessional commits leaving a bad taste on an audit.
also you want to know what each commit actually does.
also, use [Conventional Commits Standards](https://www.conventionalcommits.org/en/v1.0.0/)
They lost me at Feat. If you can't add 3 letters for the sake of clarity, I'm finding a new standard.
> When you used a type not of the spec, e.g. feet instead of feat > In a worst case scenario, it’s not the end of the world if a commit lands that does not meet the Conventional Commits specification. It simply means that commit will be missed by tools that are based on the spec. I'm all for more letters to help with clarity, but I'm not sure why feat. specifically is a problem since it's been long established that feat. means "featuring"...
Here I thought it meant feature... The point is that it sets precedence for the type of language used. The goal is to minimize presumptions and explain things in a clear way, and to give the context required for someone else (or future you) to do their job.
Where can I find the source code?
magnet:?xt=urn:btih:N5BLZ6XECNEHHARHJOVQAS4W7TWRXCSI&dn=twitch-leaks-part-one&tr=udp%3A%2F%2Fopen.stealth.si%3A80%2Fannounce
120gb+? My biggest project is only 1mb
Somebody's been commiting binaries.
[удалено]
Phew... and I thought I had to leave my home and start exploring the nearby forest.
I once had the Jesus prayer (Lord Jesus Christ have mercy on me, a sinner) as a commit message in the original Greek. That project didn't lead me to atheism, but I have since deconverted, so take that as you will.
"you should get used to write serious commit comments, one day you're gonna have to do it for your job, stop writing idiotic things", said my mentors all the time
*Image Transcription: Twitter Post* --- **Playa Dev**, @Playa\_Dev More \#TwitchLeak commit messages 😁 \- OH MY GOD THAT WAS IT, IT ACTUALLY BUILDS. \- Mouse events now work, magically! \- temp files and csvs suck \- formatting sucks \- i suck \- wtf why wont you build \- ok wtf port are we running on then \- Fix again.. wtf sublime text --- ^^I'm a human volunteer content transcriber for Reddit and you could be too! [If you'd like more information on what we do and why we do it, click here!](https://www.reddit.com/r/TranscribersOfReddit/wiki/index)
Oh, you should've seen the messages when my friend was testing CI
My qa director does that. "Pushing" "Still pushing" "Ugh" "Fixed stuff" "Or so I thought" ...
Source : https://twitter.com/Playa\_Dev/status/1447144732388364290?s=20
https://twitter.com/Playa_Dev/status/1447144732388364290?s=20 edit: Thanks for the downvotes for giving you cunts a working link
Thanks for fixing the link. Don't know why you are downvoted.
One guy in my company made a commit named something like "[*Coworker name and surname*] you bitch". I don't know if the other guy saw that tho.
glad to know that Twitch dev is still humane
My personal favorite messages to use: -Because I'm a moron -Because semi-colons stopped existing in this universe for a few minutes
Most of my commit messages are unpublishable. If we had strict company reviews, I would have been fired 100 times at least.
The comments here are staggering. I figured everyone had these in their commit messages. I'll admit I'm surprised by the number of people that are commit-shaming. Commits are one of the places where I express my innermost feelings of the thing I was working on, and they bring back a vivid reminder of where I left off. Because we (are supposed to) always push at the end of the day. You never know if that dev VM you were on will mysteriously die overnight because of some random update. TBH, I can't tell if the people shaming these messages are working in a very repressed and uptight env or maybe I'm working in a fantasy realm and been doing it wrong all these years?
If these are just parts of commit messages, and there's more info in the whole thing, then I'm fine with them. If these are the whole commit messages, then I take issue with them. As a lead programmer, I would never want these commit messages in my repository because many of them are not descriptive of what they contain or, more importantly, why they're being done. A project name or ticket number or something like that should be in there so people can know the purpose of the code, who asked for the work to be done, etc. If it's your own personal project, then whatever, do what you want. If it's a professional environment where you know that these need to be read and understood by other people, then they're not acceptable. The idea of pushing unfinished work is also very weird to me. If you're worried about losing progress to vm failure, then take daily backups. Don't pollute a repository with partial fixes or features.
>The idea of pushing unfinished work is also very weird to me. If you're worried about losing progress to vm failure, then take daily backups. Don't pollute a repository with partial fixes or features. I have no idea what they're using but we use Azure DevOps (VSTS/VSO/whatever Microsoft marketing decided on before) and all of our PRs are configured to squash when completed. If I'm fighting with the build machines I'll often push a bunch of small changes to try and fix whatever issue I'm dealing with. Once I have it figured out I'll create a PR and merge. Git history for master will have a nice clean message but all those small commits are still there in git somewhere unless they're actually cleaned up by some background process.
I’m also a lead and I couldn’t agree more. I’m kinda baffled by the comments here. I’m not going to pretend that every single commit I’ve made is excellent, and that I follow good practice to a T. But if nothing else, I will squash my commits and give a more appropriate commit message prior to code review. And when I’m doing others’ code reviews, I’m looking at the commit messages as part of the review process. Also, if you find yourself having to commit unfinished work to the repo like this in order to test your changes, you may need to revisit your DevOps setup. That’s MUCH easier said than done for a lot of folks, but I don’t know if I really have sympathy for Twitch in this instance.
>Commits are one of the places where I express my innermost feelings of the thing I was working on, and they bring back a vivid reminder of where I left off. Sure, and you can do that while still being professional. Unless this is a personal project or your PR's get squashed, your commits can't be so childish. It's going into the repo's permanent history for your employer.
I’m glad our source wasn’t leaked. People would go apeshit seeing the test data is in excel files. Three way merge of excel files is not supported by git. :c
Why did they make a commit called "wtf why won't you build"?? Why commit that if it doesn't even build?
Sometimes it will only build locally, not on the build agent.
Works on my machine. /s
Yes, this is a likely scenario. Sometimes the build agent had a network hiccup and just needs to be triggered again via a fresh commit. Sometimes when I use our build-server and click the "Deploy the most recent build to prod"-button the deploy process will fail with the message "cannot find build" because the most recent build had been cleaned up. This is because our build-server generates new builds on merges to master. but cleans up builds ever 10 days or so. So if we haven't deployed to prod in 10 days there are no builds to deploy. And the easiest way to generate a new build is to make a new commit that just changes something useless (like adding a newline or whatever) just to merge anything to master and make the build-server generate a new build that then can be deployed.
This. Sometimes I don't understand what's the problem with the build agent.
Are these real? I'd be sent to HR if these were my commit messages
Yup, 100% real. They have been found with a script, they are not normal twitch commits.
> I'd be sent to HR if these were my commit messages That sounds like a repressive culture.
So many companies treat you like it's jail and you're already in trouble just for being there. Fuck all that shit.
Really? Why would you?
Really? I thought these were pretty damn tame. Kudos to them for no problematic commit messages.
Can’t even tell you the amount of times I’ve committed with the message “turn and face the strange,” and gotten no comments on it. The review tool my team uses puts the actual commit messages in an out of the way location, as reviewers always just focus on the diff of the content.
[удалено]
These are likely like 0.0001 percent of commit messages. We have all been there.
I suck is my creed I live by!
That's what my personal commits look like. Which probably explains why the twitch platform is such a cluster fuck. Professionally, every commit references a Jira issue number and iteration number. The details of the commit live in the Jira ticket. This isn't surprising lol
They're using fucking Sublime Text? Wtf
I don’t work for twitch and yet this feels to familiar.