small rant incoming
I work for a company that it’s mostly hardware focused, but we do ship some software for the final consumer including drivers and programs, to make use of said hardware.
While I am not in the software department, I held some SWE positions in previous companies for over a decade, our software isn’t very complex and I do know most of it pretty well.
Our employee just announced a new AI-only development cycle, they want all code submissions and reviews to be exclusively done by claude, effectively ending ownership of the code being shipped to customers. This is absolute madness.
Today, I received an email scheduling a workshop on how to integrate claude into vscode and how to work with the new gitflow, namely removing our authorship from commits and having al code reviews done by a LLM now.
I am just baffled at the decision.
edit: wow I’m a bit overwhelmed by the response, I did read all of you. Thanks!
A clone of a git repository is a full backup.
And then you accidentally pull / force pull or something and your “backup” is fucked.
Adding an extra step for a harder-to-find backup makes it more difficult to accidentally hose your known-good state.
I’ve seen cases where the commit was still there, even though there were no pointers (branches/tags) pointing at it. Which raises the question, when does git delete a commit?
By default, when it’s older than two weeks and you run any of the standard commands which trigger a GC check.
Docs here: https://git-scm.com/docs/git-gc
this is one of the most common cases in which you want to mutate your history, and correctly excising content from a commit will change the commit shasum, and make the previous commit shasum (intentionally) irretrievable (from remote, at least). If the shasum doesn’t change, you haven’t removed anything.