cast(mountains) as:Mountains

Eh what a dumpster fire take.

Also, if you wanted to try to fool simpler minds than yours into believing you are informed, and not an inbred mouth breather, at least attend to your spelling. ‘Indites’ is not a word. You and MTG really struggle with that one hey?

Bun is used by us in production, in dev, everywhere. It’s great. We don’t even use (p)npm to build js packages on our docker images for apps anymore.

Enjoy what you deserve.

Don’t try to tell me what I saw with my own eyes the other day. I’ve seen aurora before, plenty, but not like that.

Yes, that is another benefit, once you start getting muscle memory with the library. You start to parcel things by context a bit more. It’s upped my habit of discrete commit-by-hunks, which also serves as a nice self-review of the work.

🤦 your reading comprehension “bro”

Yes it sure is! Just as easy as it is to not be a permanent cynic about fucking everything, because (and I speak from past experience I wish people would learn from here) that takes effort too.

Consider: the caloric energy expenditure in your pointless stating the obvious above, now multiply that by how often you do this. Carry the 2. Imagine using that on something productive! Think of the Bitcoin you could own!! All the energy needed for that Bitcoin’s gonna need at least 50 seconds of fusion.

And so: we’ve come full circle, as was prophesied.

God not this shit again.

👏 Super duper this is the way. No notes!

https://gitmoji.dev/

Quasi parallel reply to your other post, this would kind of echo the want for a capital letter at the start of the commit message. Icon indicates overall topic nature of commits.

Lets say I am adding a database migration and my commit is the migration file and the schema. My commit message might be:

     🗃️ Add notes to Users table

So anyone looking at the eventual pr will see the icon and know that this bunch of work will affect db without all that tedious “reading the code” part of the review, or for team members who didn’t participate in reviews.

I was initially hesitant to adopt it but I have very reasonable, younger team mates for whom emojis are part of the standard vocabulary. I gradually came to appreciate and value the ability to convey more context in my commits this way. I’m still guilty of the occasionally overusing:

   ♻️ Fix the thing

type messages when I’m lazy; doesn’t fix that bad habit, but I’m generally much happier reading mine or someone else’s PR commit summary with this extra bit of context added.

Could have been worse. I mean, like, imagine of you were using like CVS and you put a watch on the root! Haha and then like every trivial commit in the repo caused everyone to in the entire org to get an email and it crashed the email servers.

Like who’d even DO that?! Though, I bet if you met that guy he’d be ok. Like not a jerk, and pretty sorry for all those emails. A cool guy.

You nailed it with the critique of commit messages. We use gitmoji to convey at-a-glance topic for commits and otherwise adhere to Tim Pope’s school of getting to the point

100% they do. Rebase is an everyday thing, merge is for PRs (for me anyway). Or merges are for regular branches if you roll that way. The only wrong answer is the one that causes you to lose commits and have to use reflog, cos…well, then you done messed up now son… (but even then hope lives on!)

Here’s an example

Say I work on authentication under feature/auth Monday and get some done. Tuesday an urgent feature request for some logging work comes in and I complete it on feature/logging and merge clean to main. To make sure all my code from Monday will work, I will then switch to feature/auth and then git pull --rebase origin main. Now my auth commits start after the merge commit from the logging pr.

Merge keeps the original timeline. Your commits go in along with anything else that happened relative to the branch you based your work off (probably main). This generates a merge commit.

Rebase will replay all the commits that happened while you were doing your work before your commits happen, and then put yours at the HEAD, so that they are the most recent commits. You have to mitigate any conflicts that impact the same files as these commits are replayed, if any conflicts arise. These are resolved the same way any merge conflict is. There is no frivolous merge commit in this scenario.

TlDR; End result, everything that happened to the branch minus your work, happens. Then your stuff happens after. Much tidy and clean.

You’d certainly have an adequate supply of nickel for the required metallurgy…

Fuck a merge commit! Rebase ervray day bay bayyy.