51–60 of 100 posts
This is a great example of why you should enable vigilant mode [1] on your GitHub account and set your machine up to GPG sign your commits. [1] https://docs.github.com/en/github/authenticating-to-github/m...
My workmates would hate me if i introduced this to production.
This is a great example of why you should enable vigilant mode [1] on your GitHub account and set your machine up to GPG sign your commits. [1] https://docs.github.com/en/github/authenticating-to-github/m...
But if you gpg sign your commit Now all your contributors will have to sign their next commits too. My workmates would hate me if i introduced this to production.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
git blame can't possibly work well in all cases, which is why the author is saying that. Git doesn't store what actually was changed. Git stores how to reconstruct the new file from the old file in a space efficient way. This is unrelated to storage of who changed what, only "what is the minimal way to reproduce the end state from the beginning state". As a result, tools like blame take the two versions and try to fi…
It doesn't have to be that detailed or bullet-proof to be good enough for like 90% of cases.
Others were to blame for past threads: Git Blame-Someone-Else - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21004193 - Sept 2019 (66 comments) Git-blame-someone-else – Blame someone else for your bad code - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11049993 - Feb 2016 (65 comments)
This has saved me so many times. I’m sure I would have lost my job a while ago had I not been able to use this, it’s one of my most actively use tools. I’m sure eventually I’ll be losing my job, but at least this repo has enabled me to keep it a little bit longer.
Curious how do you get away with it without anyone noticing. Doesn’t this imply rewriting the master branch? Wouldn’t that cause noticeable issues for everyone else? Or maybe you’re the only active contributor on that codebase (but then who else can you blame?)
To be honest, when you really think about it, any commit that is not GPG signed is unverifiable. It could be anybody. I wish signing commits was more widespread.
It’s not just blame. GitHub uses commits to build the contributor list on your repo home page, so you can make it look like it has some famous contributors: https://github.com/jayphelps/git-blame-someone-else/graphs/c...
Others were to blame for past threads: Git Blame-Someone-Else - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21004193 - Sept 2019 (66 comments) Git-blame-someone-else – Blame someone else for your bad code - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11049993 - Feb 2016 (65 comments)
Does it feel like gardening? Moderating HN that is. It'd have to be one of those "wild gardens" that's mostly the plants doing what they want with a bit of nudging. Pull out a weed here, tie up some branches there, clear the path, give a little extra water to something that didn't get a good chance yet, etc. Sorry for the OT, I was just curious if that analogy resonated.
it runs git rebase under the hood, in production environment with multiple people pushing to repo it will break things and it'll be spotted immediately. So this actually shows how hard it is to spoof commit author, you can't do it without leaving a trace, git is a solid system.