735

We're not the same! (period) (programming.dev)

submitted 10 months ago by hypnotic_nerd@programming.dev to c/programmer_humor@programming.dev

36 comments fedilink hide all child comments

all 37 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[-] backhdlp@lemmy.blahaj.zone 95 points 10 months ago

I don't open source my code bc I don't understand git

[-] nastyyboi@lemmy.world 44 points 10 months ago

So, you don't "git it"?

I'll escort myself out.

[-] HamBrick@programming.dev 6 points 10 months ago

Git push yourself out* to make the obvious joke

[-] HangingFruit@lemmy.world 32 points 10 months ago

We are the same

[-] ImplyingImplications@lemmy.ca 23 points 10 months ago

git good

[-] gratux@lemmy.blahaj.zone 20 points 10 months ago

it's just linked lists of commits (except when merging)

[-] xx3rawr@sh.itjust.works 14 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

I don't understand linked lists

[-] QuazarOmega@lemy.lol 20 points 10 months ago

In internet terms: It's just a soyjak holding a box with data who is pointing at another soyjak holding a box with data who is pointing at another {insert N-3 of the same soyjaks} soyjak with a box with data without an arm to point with

[-] ibk@lemmy.world 5 points 10 months ago

I don't understand what a soyjak is.

[-] QuazarOmega@lemy.lol 20 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

soyjaks pointing linked list

Kourtesy of Krita

[-] sheepishly@kbin.social 6 points 10 months ago

I still don't understand Git but I like this image

[-] gratux@lemmy.blahaj.zone 5 points 10 months ago

each commit points to the one before. additionally a commit stores which lines in which files changed compared to the previous commit. a branch points to a particular commit.

[-] Denvil@lemmy.one 4 points 10 months ago

It's just a thingie

[-] philm@programming.dev 3 points 10 months ago

Almost... To be precise it's a Merkle DAG

[-] jack@monero.town 14 points 10 months ago

It's perfectly fine to just make a zip available

[-] shaked_coffee@feddit.it 11 points 10 months ago

Branchophobic

[-] frezik@midwest.social 5 points 10 months ago

There's a guy out there who made a reversible NES emulator, meaning it can run games backwards and come to the correct state. He made a brilliant post on Reddit /r/programming linking his ideas for the emulator to quantum mechanics.

Then he was asked why he didn't distribute his program in git. He said that he didn't know git.

To me, that's a pretty good example of the difference between computer science and software engineering.

[-] xigoi@lemmy.sdf.org 1 points 10 months ago

You can open source your code just by uploading it on some kind of cloud storage and setting it as publicly available.

[-] sheepishly@kbin.social 25 points 10 months ago

Jokes on you, the reason I don't open source my code is because I never finish writing it

[-] dantheclamman@lemmy.world 5 points 10 months ago

Commitmentphobe

[-] itsnotits@lemmy.world 3 points 10 months ago

Joke's* on you

(Short for "The joke is on you".)

[-] sheepishly@kbin.social 6 points 10 months ago

Jokes on you, my apostrophe key is broken

[-] dan@upvote.au 0 points 10 months ago

But that's one of the benefits of open source. Post your code and find someone else to finish it :D

[-] xmunk@sh.itjust.works 17 points 10 months ago

Personally, I open source my code as a resume.

[-] DoomBot5@lemmy.world 3 points 10 months ago

Is that why nobody would hire you? /s

[-] CJOtheReal@ani.social 11 points 10 months ago

I don't open it because there is more comment than code...

[-] autokludge@programming.dev 7 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

\README.md

[-] CJOtheReal@ani.social 4 points 10 months ago

Nah fuck that, thats bloat.

[-] QuazarOmega@lemy.lol 3 points 10 months ago

Ah, another professional documentation writer, greetings!

[-] fraydabson@sopuli.xyz 8 points 10 months ago

Lol is it bad this is the reason I setup a self hosted gitea instead of GitHub

[-] urda@lebowski.social 5 points 10 months ago

That's a lot of spaghetti

[-] bela@lemm.ee 4 points 10 months ago

I don't open source because the open source idea values mainly practical advantage and does not campaign for principles.

When we call software “free,” we mean that it respects the users' essential freedoms: the freedom to run it, to study and change it, and to redistribute copies with or without changes. This is a matter of freedom, not price, so think of “free speech,” not “free beer.”

These freedoms are vitally important. They are essential, not just for the individual users' sake, but for society as a whole because they promote social solidarity—that is, sharing and cooperation. They become even more important as our culture and life activities are increasingly digitized. In a world of digital sounds, images, and words, free software becomes increasingly essential for freedom in general.

Tens of millions of people around the world now use free software; the public schools of some regions of India and Spain now teach all students to use the free GNU/Linux operating system. Most of these users, however, have never heard of the ethical reasons for which we developed this system and built the free software community, because nowadays this system and community are more often spoken of as “open source,” attributing them to a different philosophy in which these freedoms are hardly mentioned.

Some of the supporters of open source considered the term a “marketing campaign for free software,” which would appeal to business executives by highlighting the software's practical benefits, while not raising issues of right and wrong that they might not like to hear. Other supporters flatly rejected the free software movement's ethical and social values. Whichever their views, when campaigning for open source, they neither cited nor advocated those values. The term “open source” quickly became associated with ideas and arguments based only on practical values, such as making or having powerful, reliable software. Most of the supporters of open source have come to it since then, and they make the same association. Most discussion of “open source” pays no attention to right and wrong, only to popularity and success; here's a typical example. A minority of supporters of open source do nowadays say freedom is part of the issue, but they are not very visible among the many that don't.

The two now describe almost the same category of software, but they stand for views based on fundamentally different values. For the free software movement, free software is an ethical imperative, essential respect for the users' freedom. By contrast, the philosophy of open source considers issues in terms of how to make software “better”—in a practical sense only. It says that nonfree software is an inferior solution to the practical problem at hand.

[-] ShitOnABrick@lemmy.world 3 points 10 months ago

I swear I saw this posted a few weeks back

[-] OsrsNeedsF2P@lemmy.ml 3 points 10 months ago

Stop not open sourcing your stuff because you think it's embarrassing. Some of the best products are made by junior devs, since they come with the fresh ideas and energy to change the status quo.