I always feel like my code is the best in personal projects when I don’t need to conform to whatever style and architecture has been decided on by history and committee.
For me it's always, "this is hacky as shit, but it works, and nobody will ever see it but me."
My most arcane pieces of code (abusing null references to make the garbage collector handle object deletion kind of cursed) are usually posted publicly somewhere... If it works and all that.
Gotta review the 5 line PR ten times just to make absolutely totally sure there's nothing wrong with it before submitting it.
Prefer --force-with-lease. It doesn't make a difference in this scenario, but it's a safer habit/default.
There is no reason to force push anymore - force with lease is always preferable. So said, a frequent rebaser.
Force with lease will send up what your local thinks the most recent commit on the branch was and the host will reject the push if it knows of a more recent commit on that branch. Basically, it saves you from overwriting a commit you didn't realize existed.
I have never contributed to an open source project before, so if we exclude the third part this is the reverse of my habits. The stuff I do for work is bare minimum garbage, I freely admit. I really do not like my employer.
Aaand here's why production software is so damn buggy. I'm not faulting you personally, just your employer.
You saying the code quality of some of my colleagues is even worse on their personal projects? o_O
I would like to contribute to open source but I'm not confident enough or understand git properly. As solo dev I only have to fulfill my boss's standards, they seam to be low.
Yeh, for me git is a backup system.
My boss gave me a hand on some bits (more, I set up a framework and he could tweak pages). Anyway, I fixed some stuff, tidied some of his shit, then trying to get git to merge that back into his workspace REALLY stretched my knowledge of git LUL.
I'm sure doing that every day would get me up to speed, but ATM commit/push means "backup" to me
