git mindfuck of the day:

• While merging branch B into branch A, A is “ours”, B is “theirs” (changes from B are reflected in A)

• When rebasing branch B on top of branch A, A is ”ours”, B is “theirs” (changes from A are reflected in B)

https://nitaym.github.io/ourstheirs/

Guess what? I may regret this but at least i can rollback. #Fedora #rebase

Warm take: I'm pretty much done with #git rebase.

I get the argument that the merge commits represent a cluttering of history, but ultimately I don't agree.

To me, the act of updating my branch with the latest from master represents a change, and I want that change recorded.

Not saying I'd refuse if a team I was on ever DEMANDED I rebase, just saying that for my money it's a bucket of faff for zero actual gain.

#git #philosophy #rebase #sucks :)

Is crawl into a ball under my desk and cry an option?

developer life

I don't get why some colleagues see #rebasing as drudgery.

It's quality time, not spent on talking back and forth :-)

Please let this #rebase session go on just for a little while,

Then I'll go back to sorting out the unclear requirements for the next user story.

Hi Shakil, if you want to use quote_tweet like feature, you can ‘reply’ to a post; or copy the URL of the post that you want to add your thoughts and link share the post. Many people find even the practice of link sharing like this offensive, but people’s milage varies. In some software such as #Soapbox with #Rebase, (I used to think in #Pleroma as well, but I am not sure), you can quote post as you’d normally do. I find a lot of value in quote boosts as it adds context and used in the right way, it is a great way to generate conversations.

#pleromaadmins / #mastodonadmins  I'm having this weird issue where some instance with people I want to follow, just stay at "approval waiting" and stays there. Any one know why that's the case?