Torvalds didn't seem to have a very high opinion of it πŸ˜‚

all 26 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 45 points 3 months ago (10 children)

So he used GIT while developing GIT?

  • source
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 21 points 3 months ago (8 children)

    It was probably initially developed using a different VCS (e.g., svn), and when git became feature-complete that "svn" history was imported into git.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 18 points 3 months ago (6 children)

    That first commit is only ~1000loc and reads and writes commits. It was almost certainly not using version control first.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 3 months ago (4 children)

    I've initialized repos and committed smaller first commits though. I'm not sure I follow this argument.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 11 points 3 months ago (3 children)

    It took about a day to get to be β€œself-hosting” so that I could start committing things into git using git itself, so the first day or so is hidden, but everything else is there.

    https://www.linuxfoundation.org/blog/blog/10-years-of-git-an-interview-with-git-creator-linus-torvalds

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 3 months ago (2 children)

    Yeah I mean I'm not saying it's not true, I'm just not following your argument for why it's true.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 3 months ago (1 child)

    Context. I was replying to this comment claiming it was β€œprobably” using VCS.

    It was probably initially developed using a different VCS (e.g., svn), and when git became feature-complete that "svn" history was imported into git.

    I thought explaining it was only a tiny project at that point would be enough.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago*

    I know the context, I followed the thread, and I understood your argument to be that it was only a small project (you mentioned LOC).

    But then I presented a counter argument that I've made repos for less code than that, so I don't see how that's an argument for "obviously" not using a VCS.

    I sometimes feel like people throw around the term "obvious". πŸ€·β€β™‚οΈ

    To me it wasn't obvious because of my personal experience.

    You didn't use that term, but I feel like you presented your argument as an obvious fact. If you know what I mean. 😁

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 29 points 3 months ago (7 children)

    Git really is one of those things that just feel like it was pulled from the fabric of the universe, the basic way it works feels so cromulent and obvious in hindsight.

    I just wish we'd normalize using it for everyday stuff, a while ago i decided to publish the modpack i'd been fiddling on and almost immediately i realized how much more reliable everything became, no longer did i worry about fucking something up and making the whole thing unusable!
    And obviously actual version management prevents final_final_(1).odt situations

  • source
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 3 months ago (4 children)

    I like how cromulent wasn't a word

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 3 months ago (3 children)

    But it is now? Did I just witness creation?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 3 months ago* (2 children)

    Simpsons created it. In the episode where jebediah springfields quote "a noble spirit embiggens the smallest man" is scrutinized for "embiggens" not being a word. They say it's a perfectly cromulent word. Which itself was not a word, but given the context has a clear meaning. And people decided to start using it as a joke, and then enough people used it, it eventually became real.

    Technically all words work that way, but this feels just that little bit more artificial. There wasn't really a need for it, we have words for that context already, so it wouldn't have naturally spread. But it's still fun to have watched it happen over time, knowing it was probably gonna happen even though it shouldn't have.

    Edit: the details may not be exactly right, it's been nigh-on 30 years now since I've seen that episode, but that's the gist of it, from what I recall.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 15 points 3 months ago

    That’s damn cool. Thanks

  • source
  • [–] 13 points 3 months ago (1 child)

    Somehow I never even wondered what git stands for. If someone was to ask me I probably would’ve guessed β€žget it?β€œ

    At least it didnβ€˜t end up being called geddit though. Can you imagine?

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 3 points 3 months ago

    For the people out there, who, like me, started wondering too, this is quoted from the readme:

    "git" can mean anything, depending on your mood.

    • random three-letter combination that is pronounceable, and not actually used by any common UNIX command. The fact that it is a mispronounciation of "get" may or may not be relevant.
    • stupid. contemptible and despicable. simple. Take your pick from the dictionary of slang.
    • "global information tracker": you're in a good mood, and it actually works for you. Angels sing, and a light suddenly fills the room.
    • "goddamn idiotic truckload of sh*t": when it breaks
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 4 points 3 months ago

    pronounciation

    😬 Wish I could amend that commit, just a teensy bit.

  • source
  • [–] 3 points 3 months ago
    [–] 2 points 3 months ago

    Committed by Linus Torvalds!

  • source
  • Well worth a read. I like that it gives a better intro into git than any doc page. Also, props for those short and to the point source files. Only downside is not enough comments in sources.

  • source