111–120 of 238 posts
As one of the GitHub cofounders and the brainchild of this particular feature, I want to let everyone know that this is maybe the funniest thing I've ever done. We released this feature and published the announcing blog post, on April Fool's Day, 2010. I remember demoing it to the other GitHub guys and saying how funny it would be if we made this an April Fool's day post as though it was a big stupid joke but then it…
I'd prefer just spam emails saying the system is shutting down
I'd love to hear from someone who's still using SVN professionally and can explain why they prefers it to Git. I used SVN very early in my career. I think the only good thing I can say about it is that it's easier to learn. It's quite easy to teach a junior dev how to use SVN. Git takes much longer to master.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Until nobody believed us. I remember having this problem with Gmail's "1GB for everyone!" April 1 announcement.
I think April 1st should definitely be "Crazy-but-real announcement day". It'll take some attention off the unfunnier-every-year "jokes" which have turned a pleasant and fun yearly occasion into the internet being unusable for ~36 hours.
As one of the GitHub cofounders and the brainchild of this particular feature, I want to let everyone know that this is maybe the funniest thing I've ever done. We released this feature and published the announcing blog post, on April Fool's Day, 2010. I remember demoing it to the other GitHub guys and saying how funny it would be if we made this an April Fool's day post as though it was a big stupid joke but then it…
heh heh heh, yeah nobody
I remember when they added Subversion support; I thought it was hilarious. And it worked! This quote from the linked blog post made me raise my eyebrows though: > In 2010…it was not yet clear that distributed version control would eventually take over, and even less clear that Git would be the dominant system. I think it was actually extremely clear that Git would win. It had a guaranteed audience by virtue of hostin…
I think you're forgetting about Mercurial, which was also created by a Linux kernel developer around the same time. It brought all the same benefits of git, but had a simpler command line API and better cross platform support. Mercurial saw wide use, especially in large corporations like Facebook.
Indeed, a lot of people will say that it was the success of github itself that pushed git over the top. In a world where bitbucket won instead of github, we could all be using mercurial.
Although I've never used it, I'm not sure how much of an improvement either of these was over BitKeeper. The primary impetus to create git and mercurial was licensing changes in BitKeeper, not technical deficiencies.
I remember when they added Subversion support; I thought it was hilarious. And it worked! This quote from the linked blog post made me raise my eyebrows though: > In 2010…it was not yet clear that distributed version control would eventually take over, and even less clear that Git would be the dominant system. I think it was actually extremely clear that Git would win. It had a guaranteed audience by virtue of hostin…
It also let you put permissions on the repository itself, so if you didn't have the correct ACLs you couldn't see part of the code. It was really good for monorepos.
It has its quirks, and when I used it, could be a bit slower on the execution side, but generally thought it was really nice.
I also maintain that Mercurial & Fossil are superior to git, but git won the marketshare so its kinda moot now.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Instead add FTP version control support with the ability to create backup files.
source.php.old.ReallyOld.bak.thistimeitsold.old