Aversion to Git?

[Lemur]

Eventually you get to a level where doing large enough things will warrant it, or changing something constantly will warrant it. Being able to track your progress is invaluable, among other things.

 

[TheoAllen]

That is if they really want to do a big module. For me who have made its own battle system, I know that right. Version control is really important. However, some people here just avoid of making big things. 

 

[Lemur]

That is if they really want to do a big module. For me who have made its own battle system, I know that right. Version control is really important. However, some people here just avoid of making big things. 

And for that perhaps there's not a reason for it, but even if I make something small I tend to put it under source control if I consider it to be a module that can be extended upon at all. I use Gist on occasion for proofs of concept and sketching out ideas because it gives me revisions as well, consider it a Git-lite for small files. Pastebin doesn't stack up well against gist solely because of the revision abilities it has.

For instance, take these two gems which have maybe 10-15 lines of actual code in them (lib folder):

• https://github.com/baweaver/streamable
• https://github.com/baweaver/pipeable

Because I know I may be changing them as extensions to other scripts, I keep them under version control and gem version numbers.

Now, as far as what I tend to gist:

• Abusing Flipflops - https://gist.github.com/baweaver/d02ffd9c24219ae89600
• Conditional Piping - https://gist.github.com/baweaver/e77f80e4a84925ff0044

These are far more of "Hey, look what I can do!" scripts than something I intend to be changing or putting much further work into.

My threshold tends to be how often I see myself potentially updating something or wanting others to be able to update it as well.

 

[Dr.Yami]

I think mostly scripters there are not programmers, they just want to help community to have some "unique" games so their knowledge about revision control (or version control) is close to zero, and so they don't want to learn a whole new thing that doesn't support their work IRL.

Anyway, using version control for small scripts is good too, since "many" small scripts is big too, it's hard to keep track of editing many scripts that do different things. When RMVXA was first released (demo version), I only did small scripts, but then I lost in code because after one or two week, I forgot what I had changed in those scripts for debugging.

IMO, scripters should know a bit about version control too, at least know to use GitHub, because it provides GUI so that even newbies can easily use without troubles. Also, learning to post feedback (issues) and commit their fixes/features to a repo is a need too.

 

[TheoAllen]

And for that perhaps there's not a reason for it,

There IS a reason.

For example, people ask

"Hey, can you fix this thing?"

"Sure, lemme fix that. Here is the patch" *give pastebin link*

"Thanks very much! You're great"

"No problem"

*leaves*

And he will never continue to keep on track on his script. He doesn't have a point on that thing and prefer to do something else. And there might some people here doing their script for the lulz.

I think mostly scripters there are not programmers, they just want to help community to have some "unique" games so their knowledge about revision control (or version control) is close to zero, and so they don't want to learn a whole new thing that doesn't support their work IRL.

I said this on the first reply :3

Keep in mind that I only give the (possible) answer from the title of this topic, "Aversion to Git"

 

[Dr.Yami]

Sometimes, I really hate to fix my own work (for RM) because I didn't use RCS before, and RM's code management is so stupid ' 3')=q

 

[whitesphere]

When I interview interns or other people seeking jobs, I'll throw out their resumes without a second thought if they don't have something public on Github or a like site.

This only makes sense if the prospective programmer is working with open source code at his/her job.  For obvious reasons, business proprietary software is NOT going to go on Github.

Not every programmer is working on open source code.

 

[Galenmereth]

GitHub isn't just for open source code, nor is Git tied to GitHub at all. The important part of this discussion is that any programmer should learn to use version control software as early as possible. It doesn't have to be Git, and even if it is Git, it doesn't have to be hosted anywhere; you could keep it all local, which is default. Or use any other backup solution for your git projects, like an external hard drive. You can even setup your own private Git repo server if you're so inclined

But using version control software is paramount for a healthy code enviornment, and perhaps even more importantly: It makes for a healthy programmer. Most people seem to ignore the strain having to "keep things in your head" puts on you over time; if you can offload code history commits, branches and changes to a piece of software, you free up your mind and lessen the burden of worrying from yourself. When you do programming for a long time, you'll start appreciating that, as the number of projects tend to grow exponentially over time.

 

[whitesphere]

The important part of this discussion is that any programmer should learn to use version control software as early as possible.

On this I agree 100%.  Version control is absolutely a crucial skill for a programmer.   At a minimum, it makes it possible to keep track of the many changes code undergoes, to say nothing of release tags and branches. 

So is commenting the code intelligently, for that matter.  I can't say how many times my own comments helped me understand what I was doing, when I went back to the code months or years later.

 

[Tsukihime]

This only makes sense if the prospective programmer is working with open source code at his/her job.  For obvious reasons, business proprietary software is NOT going to go on Github.


Not every programmer is working on open source code.

However, if you have no projects to show outside of your job, that would be a criteria when they're picking candidates.


Even something as simple as a Hello World website would probably put you ahead of someone who claims to know how to make websites.


Though, I don't put all of my stuff on git either, so I guess if they don't accept blogs I'm SOL

 

[Shaz]

So is your topic about aversion to Git or aversion to version control? You started off really focussing on Git, and that's what I thought you were all about. I have used version control, but not for my RPG Maker scripts - I have no desire to keep and support multiple versions of the scripts I write. If I make a mistake and need to go back, I'll use the backups I have on my PC.

 

[TheoAllen]

Talking about version control... this may looks silly, but here is my version control 
 

 

[Kaelan]

Although extremely tedious, that can address versioning, but it still sort of defeats the point of a backup, though. You want it to live outside your PC, so it's impossible to lose it all irreversibly due to one problem or hardware failure.

 

[TheoAllen]

I mostly tested the script immediately. When I'm in doubt of changing stuff, I make a local backup. If it doesn't work, I can revert back easily without switch to another window. If it works, then I make a backup for my script.rvdata2 in dropbox or commit the latest source code in github / posted in pastebin.

 

[Tsukihime]

I mostly tested the script immediately. When I'm in doubt of changing stuff, I make a local backup. If it doesn't work, I can revert back easily without switch to another window. If it works, then I make a backup for my script.rvdata2 in dropbox or commit the latest source code in github / posted in pastebin.

Unless you've never had to go back and change something you did a few days or weeks ago, you probably don't keep more than one or two of the previous revisions lying around.


When I see that, ya, I'd say go get a proper version control system; it wouldn't take much more effort than copying some text around.

 

[TheoAllen]

Unless you've never had to go back and change something you did a few days or weeks ago, you probably don't keep more than one or two of the previous revisions lying around.

When I see that, ya, I'd say go get a proper version control system; it wouldn't take much more effort than copying some text around.

From my experience ... never. I never reverted back more than one or even two previous version.

I once kept 5 previous revisions and I only need to get back to the last revision instead of 2 or more.

 

[Lemur]

The more complicated you get, the more likely you are to need those old revisions. This is especially true if you're committing frequently like is recommended.

I say GitHub because it is by far the most common: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_open-source_software_hosting_facilities#Popularity

In my opinion it's superior, but that's a different matter.

As far as maintaining old versions of your software, that's not as common as you seem to think. If you're using semantic versioning and not completely breaking things on major releases you'll be fine. There's no set in stone rule that you need to continue to support older versions.

 

[TheoAllen]

There's no set in stone rule that you need to continue to support older versions.

It might be out of topic but I have released my system in two version. The old one that known as stable version and the newest one with more features but still in beta which may cause some issues. I still support the older version since it's stable from the user perpective despite it has horrible structure (they will never notice). The newest one have better structure, but since I might missed something, I kept the support for older version.

 

[tyler.kendrick]

Hobbyist game developers that I have worked with don't even want to be scripters; they typically just want to copy/paste what is available to quickly prototype some semblance of their vision.  They have no intention of learning specialized skills - and they especially don't want to hear about more efficient ways to accomplish and manage the work they have begrudgingly had to learn/produce instead of copying/pasting.

Because the engine is so limited, and professional studios very rarely consider RM products, it has remained a hobbyist tool.

Also, most version control systems (until very recently) tend to use command line interfaces rather than minimalist gui interfaces.  

From my experience, opening the command line tool on someone else's computer will immediately make them think you're using some sort of super special hacker code that only smart people can use without causing the computer to explode.  People have strong cognitive biases; command line interfaces tend to invoke some of these - which they have to put a lot of effort into overcoming.

Its really sad.  I really wish more people would pay attention when someone with specialized information instructs them on how to make their own lives easier - but that requires some small amount of effort. 

Until RM allows for more flexibility in their engine, we won't be seeing very many serious software developers in the community.  Until we have more serious software developers in the community, the majority of hobbyists who script won't be doing it effectively.

I would seriously love seeing people forking eachothers code.  Addons and bug fixes would be immeasurably easier to manage.

I just really don't think it will happen though =/

That being said...please continue hosting your code on github.  You have a lot of nice stuff up there.

...and for those who are curious, github has a beautiful, minimalistic Windows GUI