Third one should be called “A Bot”
100%
My GitHub profile looked like that for a while when I was using my own PAT for a CI step that did repo syncing.
Now a bot account gets all the credit. :(
Needs one that’s like #4 from January to September, labelled: “Fuck Github and anything else owned my Microsoft”.
deleted by creator
Nah, that’s still interacting with Github.
What’s a mondrian
Famous painter, best known for abstract paintings, see https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piet_Mondrian , section Life > Paris
Thanks
I saw an exposition of him and is pretty cool seeing him reaching and exploring until finding out that style.
In practice, I guess this would be a person with a fixed schedule that just changes a lot.
Ah rectangle dude. Invented the triangle and revolutionised art from the 1930s onwards until Picasso made minecraft
There’s also a programming language named after him: https://dangermouse.net/esoteric/piet.html
An abstract painter whose thing was overlaid rectangles in prime colors.
Wish it would include commits of our closed Gitlab instance on Github, then I wouldn’t be #4
Where’s “I get paid for my code and when I want to do something open source I make a new account and forget about it afterwards?”
what’s the rationale of creating a new account? Just for using a pseudonym, or something else?
I think the use case is simply separating your professional code from your personal code. I don’t need interviewers seeing my throwaway projects.
Yup. Officially, last I checked, GitHub encouraged people to use a single account for everything. But I wish they’d at least let people create multiple “personas” on the same account, along the lines of “Notorious Open Source Hacker Alias” vs “Random Code Monkey On Corporate Gig”.
For me, it’s contributing to open source projects that are for NSFW things, stashdb specifically.
Are you the guy I’ve been trying to contact for months? Is this why the person with a single repo is never active?
Having multiple accounts is against their TOS
“One person or legal entity may maintain no more than one free Account (if you choose to control a machine account as well, that’s fine, but it can only be used for running a machine).”
Which is absolutely stupid. I should be able to separate my work commits from my personal commits.
That said in practice, I’m guessing this is only enforced if they detect you abusing their services.
Work commit are not supposed to be made with a free account. This only says that you can’t have multiple free accounts.
I wish I saw a GitHub wizard in the wild
Be the change you wish to see - https://github.com/gelstudios/gitfiti
I’m number 4, but instead of looking for a job, the pattern is subject to my crippling depression. Most of the time I simply feel that it’s pointless to work on my projects, so I don’t :(
I see the point in my projects yet I am frustrated and depressed by my perceived lack of progress.
Want to start a project and procrastinate on it together?
I don’t see the point of anything anymore, you folks need a community manager?
I’ve made up more names for new projects than what I have actually written code for. Yall looking for a product owner?
Damn. I have the opposite problem. I make up ideas for projects that I may or may not build and can’t come up with a decent name.
My last project that I actually build was an MQTT based smart planter for integration with homeassistant using an ESP32 MCU. My project name? ESPlanter…
Wow. You’re like my polar opposite. Code is a sign of rising depression for me. When I start working on my projets, it’s time to worry because it means I’ve lost all taste for human interaction, or food, or… sleep.
Sounds like a good opportunity to draw some square kufic.
People who work at Apple: Completely Blank
don’t post pictures of my face online, that’s rude >:(
In all seriousness I wonder why I always realize I could have explained myself better/left something out/omg formatting error better fix it/holy shit typo after the initial commit, and have like 4 different ones (or a bunch of rebases in an effort to keep the repo clean of this crap) fixing it, instead of pushing just a correct and complete readme from the beginning.
This is also why most of my Lemmy comments have edits. Not some weird sketchy crap editing things in to make others look bad or totally change my point after getting refuted, but just… oops typo or I could reword that to be more understandable or I meant to say this and totally forgot about it.
Big same
Sometimes when it’s not a minor edit like when I add some documentation, I usually branch so that I commit freely then just merge it squashing all the commits
Look at this amateur, using a mouse to commit. I have a macro defined just to commit and push as a background job so that I can start editing the README again ASAP.
The worst part? “readme updates” instead of “update readme”.
I commit far too little, and I don’t use branches so all my FEAT and FIX and DOC are mixed up, and I… Oh yeah I could just do add, and commit each of them separately… Damn.
Or you could refrain from the dogmatic commit style that serves literally zero purpose because in any healthy software project nobody is ever reading the commit history like that.
History and good explanations of what was changed and why is incredibly useful for being able to determine if something is a bug, a feature, and why something was written a particular way.
I’m not super stringent on commit style, but it absolutely helps to structure commit messages, especially in larger projects where they’re being worked on piecemeal.
it looks cool and I can get back to developing software I abandoned when I have a better commit history
the “does most commits to private repositories” user
you can configure github to paint private repo commits in the tiles, that’s what I do, so it almost looks like #3, but less homogeneous.
Thanks, I didn’t know that. For others also wondering how: https://docs.github.com/en/account-and-profile/setting-up-and-managing-your-github-profile/managing-contribution-settings-on-your-profile/showing-your-private-contributions-and-achievements-on-your-profile
Kinda, theres a way orgs can now hide the activity. For example, my github:
and then when im logged in:
But GH commit tiles are a silly metric anyways.
The “my company works with bitbucket or gitlab”.
I’m the release manager for my company. I’d have so many fucking contributions 😅
or the “ew github? i’m a codeberger” :)
it’s me; i’m a codeberger.
Ew GitHub? I’d rather go back to SVN
I’m the “makes commits to Azure DevOps because that’s what his company uses” user, so mine looks a lot like number 4.
How do you
enjoylike Azure DevOps?I recently had the
pleasureof working with it. Thank god I only set up CI for a different team and I’m not part of that project.It’s… fine. Last job was an AWS shop, so I definitely had to learn the differences but all the commonly used stuff is in Azure too.
I can’t really make any legit complaints that don’t exist in AWS in a slightly different flavor.
#3 is my script that converts one particular RSS feed to .ical format, and pushes it to a repo, because setting up a website for one silly script was overkill.
#3 is actually impossible because the color gradient is relative and dynamic, is it not?
hello I also have big text
Does my text appear to you in big text? It doesn’t on my app.
I assumed you guys just did hashtags like “#mondayblues” so on sync it showed up as titles because of the markup lmao
Unless neither of you did that and I’m just going crazy, which is definitely possible
I wrote
#3as in number three. For some reason I did see your text big and bold, but my three was not.
Wheres the fucker who made loss in his commits
git commit -m
.:|:;
The Weekender is also anyone working professionally. You can’t stick any of your real work on public github.
Github has an option to show private commits in these graphs though
Yup, but you might have another GitHub account!
deleted by creator
