git flame

Topics/tags: Miscellaneous, technical, git, short

Short version

git flame

To be used when you discover that someone pushed non-working code to the main branch. Incinerates that person, thereby limiting the amount of future damage they can do to this project or any project. [1]

Long version

I regularly use Git, a tool for collaborating on software projects that involve shared files. Git makes it easy [2] to see a history of your project, to create temporary development versions, to combine independent changes to the project, and more. Old fogies like me prefer to use Git from the command line. I use commands like git add to add a file to the project, git commit to incorporate and comment on my changes, git push to send my changes to the main repository, and git pull to bring my colleagues’ changes into my copy of the project.

Okay, it’s a bit more complicated than that. You can have multiple versions of the project. Each version is called a branch. The main branch is supposed to have the latest stable version. Those who use Git make it practice to regularly pull from the main branch so that their copy is up to date. Hence, when I teach my students how to use Git, one of the first maxims is

Never commit non-working code to the main branch!

There are other important maxims [3]. But that comes first. What should you do if you see that someone has committed non-working code? Often, the first thing you do is try to back up to before they added the code. The difficulty of doing so depends not only on your knowledge of Git but how many changes have been made. And there’s a convenient git blame to add a note about the problem.

But I’ve always wanted a more extreme command. After all, it’s incredibly frustrating to go from a working project that you can test to a non-working project that you’re then stuck mucking with it for some unspecified amount of time. It’s particularly frustrating when you were counting on time to test or fix your own code. And so I find myself wishing for a git flame command. I don’t really want to incinerate someone, but it would be nice to have a command that I could use to express my frustration [4].

Postscript: I’ve played with a variety of names for that command. I originally called this musing git sack [5]. But that didn’t feel strong enough; someone who damages projects shouldn’t be working on any project [6]. Commands like git nuke and git incinerate seem like they refer to the project, rather than to the committer. I also came up with some more extreme names for that command, few of which are fit for a public musing.

If you have a better safe-for-work variation, I’d love to hear it.

Postscript: Don’t worry. I never really get that angry. It’s just nice to envision a silly way to let off steam [7].

[1] No, not really.

[2] Well, relatively easy.

[3] For example, Don’t put the AWS keys in a public repo! That one derives from a war story I’ll tell at the next SIGCSE.

[4] Or that I could give to my students to express their frustration with their group mates.

[5] sack means to dismiss (someone) from a job.

[6] Can you tell how angry I get dealing with someone else’s mistakes?

[7] No pun intended.

Version 1.0 of 2018-12-11.