I'm real curious how he got the rights to the image on the cover.
Does it cross the threshold of originality? It is just 3d line chart. Any it hardly matters what data is actually plotted, so I assume they used something random.
Professional Software Development
31–40 of 46 posts
Re: Professional Software Development
#32What he writes about version control and svn. > its fully centralized design is largely considered obsolete > ...it is still widely used, maintained, and appropriate for a few use cases, such as for folks who require centralization and/or increased security controls for one reason or another. Statements like this sour the whole book for me and makes me feel it's written by one whose experience is lacking.
Those statements are mostly true. One of those few use cases where centralized version control still has a lot traction is game dev. Because of large files and a need to manage them efficiently on relatively limited local disks.
You also have to ask the question if the "distributed" functionality is really necessary. Even if companies use git or mercurial or whatever, most have a central repository anyway. They basically offer no extra value over Subversion on that specific (but most prominent) feature in practice.
Re: Professional Software Development
#33Earlier quoted context omitted.
Agreed, the main benefits DCVS bought is the ability to work without a constant internet connection and efficient branching/merging. For the rest most companies are using git in a way very similar to svn, but now Github/Gitlab/Bitkeeper whatever provides the role of a single authorative central server.
Your first sentence is hard to parse, but it seems like you are saying (1) DCVS has more efficient branching than git, and (2) implying git requires a constant internet connection. In which case, (1) is dubious -- got benchmarks? and (2) is simply incorrect.
Is DCVS not just a typo of DVCS, ie Distributed Version Control System, of which git is one?
Re: Professional Software Development
#34Earlier quoted context omitted.
Your first sentence is hard to parse, but it seems like you are saying (1) DCVS has more efficient branching than git, and (2) implying git requires a constant internet connection. In which case, (1) is dubious -- got benchmarks? and (2) is simply incorrect.
Is DCVS not just a typo of DVCS, ie Distributed Version Control System, of which git is one?
correct
Re: Professional Software Development
#35What he writes about version control and svn. > its fully centralized design is largely considered obsolete > ...it is still widely used, maintained, and appropriate for a few use cases, such as for folks who require centralization and/or increased security controls for one reason or another. Statements like this sour the whole book for me and makes me feel it's written by one whose experience is lacking.
Agreed. The book not only needs to be fleshed out, but is severely lacking in quality.
Re: Professional Software Development
#36> 2010s:
> Continuous Integration & Delivery
> Workplace domination by “lumber-sexuals”
This is the best the author could come up with for major developments this decade?
Are you kidding?
Re: Professional Software Development
#37Earlier quoted context omitted.
Those statements are mostly true. One of those few use cases where centralized version control still has a lot traction is game dev. Because of large files and a need to manage them efficiently on relatively limited local disks.
You also have to ask the question if the "distributed" functionality is really necessary. Even if companies use git or mercurial or whatever, most have a central repository anyway. They basically offer no extra value over Subversion on that specific (but most prominent) feature in practice.
A lot of the young guys I work with don't even really know about the distributed characteristics. For them git is Bitbucket or Github. that's all they know.
Re: Professional Software Development
#38Earlier quoted context omitted.
Those statements are mostly true. One of those few use cases where centralized version control still has a lot traction is game dev. Because of large files and a need to manage them efficiently on relatively limited local disks.
You also have to ask the question if the "distributed" functionality is really necessary. Even if companies use git or mercurial or whatever, most have a central repository anyway. They basically offer no extra value over Subversion on that specific (but most prominent) feature in practice.
One great side effect of distributed is that even if your use case is generally centralized, you de facto have a lot of valid backup states available if something in the central repo gets borked in some destructive way.
Re: Professional Software Development
#39> 2010s: > Continuous Integration & Delivery > Workplace domination by “lumber-sexuals” This is the best the author could come up with for major developments this decade? Are you kidding?
For those, like me, who had no idea what a “lumbersexual” was: https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Lumbersexual
Re: Professional Software Development
#40Earlier quoted context omitted.
Its also the cover of a Joy Division lp. There might not have been a copyright. See: https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/sa-visual/pop-culture-p...
I saw a copyright on every version of that image I could find.
See also: https://adamcap.com/2011/05/19/the-history-of/ (mentioned in the Scientific American piece).