Golden take right here👏🏾. I’m convinced that my first psp jailbreak turned me into the software engineer I am today

This is so true, our store POS sucks so now I’m thinking if I can build one.

Oh god, definitely. PSP & Wii jailbreaking, hacks for some pay to win games, and constantly getting second hand tech definitely got me here.

yoo true, happened to me

story of my life

git-o-logic

git-o-logic

Imao I was so lost reading "harder better faster stronger." I thought these were new elusive commands I was unaware of. You did forget bisect 😉

@@ImperiumLibertas never needed it lol

@@LetterlessAlphabet bisect is a good and important tool and you should learn how to use it. you may only use it once every year, but when it's the right tool for the job you'll be glad you had it. knowing the commit that introduced a bug can make some bugs absolutely trivial that'd otherwise stick around a lot longer.

The wisest people are the ones who are humble enough to admit ignorance

* applauses in lisp *

🤣

I disagree with a bunch of Theo's takes. I agree, this ain't one of them.

Agree. This is one of the most solid Theo takes ever

Knowing what a file is, a bit harder than he makes it sound, i nodes, pointers, pages, is a directory a dictionary or an array? Is all memory stored in a file, is it continuous? Whats a file encoding? Whats a binary, whats an exexutable? Complilation, sym links, elfs, exe, ... .vim... Is everything a file? Is terminal just a tail, is cli just a file which is being written?

​@@ravenecho2410 At 9:57 he was talking about `cd` and `ls`, not inodes and utf-16.

why do they think that's gatekeeping?

'you need to learn programming to get a programming job' 'bro stop gatekeeping'

gold comment lol

It's always comical when the "more than one way to solve a problem" argument is used to avoid having to learn a tool that is objectively more fit for the job.

Google shared files is what kids use these days not to use source control? In my days we would email our files to each other

Maybe version control should be a curriculum module after all. Not git, but VCS in general, in the same vein as Operating Systems being a thing.

I think we need to build an extension in vscode to give a bright big red box when they haven't pulled down git changes 😂

How did someone go through the pain of multiple merge conflicts and NOT remember to pull the next time! I thought that was like burning your hand on a hot stove! You only do it once!

It's also easier to see the history of the project when every commit message is short and perfectly describes what changed

Git etiquette is the big one for me. You can teach people eventually but the road there is painful.

They wrote their own Programm in perl in 1993

@@borstenpinsel yep. Nailed it! 😜

Nobody is getting hired without knowing version control. Not in the current day

What's funny about this whole thing is the people disagreeing with Theo likely already know git, they're just complaining because *they* think knowing how a VCS works isn't table-stakes for a typical dev job, which it obviously is.

@@LiveType Depends some schools essentially act as feeders for companies so like one place i was at i had to baby sit all the new people and get them up to speed. with how everything actually works and alot of times even teach them the actual language they are going to use. its not super common but ive been at a few companies that have like entire infrastructure and staff and its essentially built to get people trained up asap. Why im not sure my main guess is just cheap labour though in the end with stacks being so different company to company training a newbie and training some one several years in isnt always that diff in some ways its nicer cause you dont have to unteach things

I actually did. But that was in 2016. Today I wouldn't hire anyone without it too

@@LiveType Nobody will _stay_ hired without following the company's version control routines, but version control is so company specific that it's a training thing regardless, making it fairly irrelevant as a hiring guide.

This whole git conversation is driven by attention seeking “exception”.

Yup, they know they are the exception and they think that it makes them exceptional.

@@nctay but none are actually exceptions

Adobe delenda est

"Update for today's work"

See conventional commits

"It doesn't compile anymore" "It compiles again"

"Fixed bug in the code"

vcs != git.

@@BittermanAndy I think a generic "version control system" was meant. I agree, it's a must have.

Git is my vcs of choice, but there are valid use cases for other systems so I am not a purist. As to how people get things done without vcs... they don't really, they just think they do. Everyone else sees main_project_final_final_last_fixed_issues_2024_may_final.c and takes a deep breath.

From first principles seems a little much, but I would expect an exam question on "what are the limitations and shortfalls of the current industry standard source control, and how would you architect an alternative that addresses those issues?".

@@duven60 Sorry, maybe exaggerating a little. I don't mean they should actually go and re-implement git - I mean the way it works should be pretty obvious to someone who understands computer science. Also, I don't want to hear "industry" mentioned in the school I'm paying for, ever. Again, I'm not there for a coding bootcamp. Employers should be paying to educate worker drones if that's the goal. Seriously, why are we volunteering to PAY to be taught only how to be worker drones? I'm probably not Theo's main demographic, I'm actually not interested in writing the same program over and over for a different corporation with a different framework. I don't want to hear about some bullshit "development methodology" some suits have come up with to make developers seem like they're being more productive in a business environment. I actually gave a shit about *computer science*. "Industry" is a dumpster fire. Why Hapsburg your education like that, by encouraging people to do what is already done? We're supposed to build the future - but NOT for "industry" - for the world! I do acknowledge your question says to improve on things, but, again, I'm not a servant of industry. Love y'all tech workers btw, but hate the game you're playing.

this is why i'm rethinking my choice to major in cs, cs classes are becoming glorified bootcamps. people need to distinguish between computer scientists and software engineers, just like we distinguish between electrical engineers and electricians.

@@urisinger3412 Most importantly, our degrees should not just be gift wrap that WE pay for when OUR LIVES are gifted to "industry". When people say "university should prepare you for industry", put on your They Live glasses, they are really saying "employees should pay for their own training". No! We should be very fucking mad about it.

After re-reading my own comment I just want to add on a little clarification here, in case anyone thinks my "dumbing down" thing is about software engineers being dumber than computer scientists. That's not what I meant at all. The reason they're dumbing things down is to pump out grads, regardless of competence, to drive down programmer wages. They call it "streamlining" what is taught - but what that means is, you still pay the same amount for your degree, but they put less useful information in your brain. We're being robbed in broad daylight. I'm not mad at anyone in this thread but I am really furious about this issue. The world is being made dumber just so that employers don't have to pay for training AND can pay lower wages. Then some of our own, ENCOURAGE THIS?! It boggles the mind. If "software engineer" should be a separate field, industry should be fully responsible for their training. Otherwise, uni should teach just PURE computer science, and force employers to provide employment training. Boycott any uni that's focused on "preparing for industry". In general, tech workers need to learn to organize their labour and force change against shit like this.

If you are a physicist, I bet you have used LaTeX. I consider git substantially easier to get the hang of than LaTeX. That being said, if you don't use LaTeX, I highly recommend you do. I don't use it much, but my physicist friends refuse to use anything else for preparing documents.

That's sad man.

for high school, totally. once you get into Uni though, (especially for CS), if youre not self learning, you probably wont make it far.

Sounds like a cultural thing. I have been grateful for the "hands off" approach I have experienced throughout the educational institutions I went to. They even let me take an exam in quantum computing despite it not being part of the curriculum in any way.

But if I can see that someone can learn by himselve than he is way more hireable for me.

I'm currently working as a lecturer's assistant. College students would not look things up outside of those that are explicitly taught in class, minus a few outliers. There are times when I teach in class where I told them "there are a lot more to find out by looking at the documentation" and 9/10 they'll not open it. Git is mentioned in passing in class in hopes they'll go figure it out, but that's not how the college student's mind works at least here.

My colleague had similar experience - they were conducting some kind of internship/course for students from local university and numbers of rants I've heard about them unable to comprehend to use separate branches was over 9000

I also went to RPI like Theo and just graduated a year ago. We had a class where all of our assignments must be submitted by pushing to a git repo

the amount of people who can't learn things on their own and seem to require constant hand holding is really disturbing. Our middle and highschools are failing to teach kids how to be self sufficient

@@moonasha then they shouldn’t get a degree and shouldn’t be able to get through university. You don’t get taught at uni, you attend lectures: the actual learning is your responsibility

I'm in favor of this, but it doesn't hurt to add a link "you can learn how to do this here".

@@dudaseifert oh sure

git takes less than a day to learn and use, but videos on YT are all crap. I should maybe create one which would be above anything else.

​@@SahilP2648for you and your 32 subs 😂

​@@paultapping9510Nobody starts with subs 🙄

@@paultapping9510 if I do, it would be more for people on YT searching about git in the future, I won't be doing it for my subscribers genius. I just don't think my video would get popular since YT favors creators which are already well established.

Technically they can. My question now is, if they have to teach you everything you need to know, how long will a cs degree be?

I had multiple semesters on Graph-related things. I'm sure at least a couple classes from any of those courses could've gone a bit more in depth into Git.

But you don't really need to know how Git works under the hood. Basic commands and a flow respected by the entire team should be more than enough.

@@Salantor Exactly, the theory and internals behind Git are fascinating and could certainly fill multiple semesters. But I've been in the field for over a decade at this point and probably 95% of my git usage it made up of the basics that I learned on my own in my first 'serious' programming course so that I didn't have to worry about shooting myself in the foot. When people say 'learn git' they mean learn the basics of how to use the tool. They don't mean know how every last piece of it works and the CS theory behind it. I know how to drive a car. I know that it needs full, I know that it can't float, can't fly, and if I'm going fast it'll take longer to stop. Do I know how the engine works? Not really, a few fairly shallow concepts yes but not the details.

​@@ludamillionyes, taking students through creating a feature branch, making changes and merging it back to a repo with a CICD loop that will fail when they've neglected the tests would be a great way to start. Explain then all the issues and why they exist, then how to do it the right way. Doesn't need to be git, in fact it's probably best to try at least a couple so they can see different approaches (mercurial or even svn as while it's out of date I think there's still a bunch of stuff using it).

I save all my projects in seperate and individual Google drive accounts

@@user-in2cs1vp6o what the fuck is wrong with you

Me neither. It's just insane

I've lost track of amount of times git has saved my ass. Just being able to restore to previous versions that worked after fucking up your code beyond repair has been a life saver. I learned early on the hard way how much of a pain in the ass coding can be without it. Every time I start a new project, I immediately git init.

@@JoshPeterson it doesn't just save your butt, it let's you experiment in ways you normally wouldn't. Let's you full send a refactor even if there's a chance you might fubar everything

In my college we dont learn git, they're teaching us how to use FileZilla FTP instead. We also never used an IDE for coding, they have us use Notepad++ instead. My school grand valley state university is 20 years behind industry standard, we're using VB script as the main programming language... We're graduating without actually knowing how to use professional development programs, and people here are thinking this is how it's actually done...

Version control != Git.

@@BittermanAndy : Absolutely. I got several programming jobs without knowing git because git was not at all a thing when i was first hired, and was only barely a thing the second time around. But I was completely competent with SVN, which is what was the open-source industry standard at the time.

I love programming. I spend hours every day after work working on my personal project. I talk about it all the time to everyone. I never used git in college. People don’t know what they are supposed to know, that’s why they go to get taught. If they don’t get taught something, how are they supposed to know to learn it?

Higher education is not some elementary school - you can't have such approach not only in computer science but in any other field - imagine doctor that doesn't read about new studies and drugs and still use medical procedures from 1980 - that's insane.

@@elorrambasdo5233 I found git outside of school specifically because I was working on a project. I didn't want to keep coding if I couldn't safely back it up and have the ability to undo changes. I think if you don't seek version control, you aren't coding something you find valuable. "If they don't get taught something how are they supposed to learn it" If you require a teacher to learn new things you are a useless person

​@@prooseeI think they meant one of higher education's absolutely inexorable purposes is to give you a framework of "to know what it is that you have to know". Not to fill your carts with all the knowledge, or to push/pull them for you, but to teach you which are the tracks of the field and how to tell them apart from the landscape of ignorance. Understandable?

@@kingxerjsaeg that's my point - if someone is not showing any signs of exploring on his own then I don't hire such person, even if he has prestigious diploma. Period. But you can have your own rules.

agree. DAG for example

I believe it would, for sure, be interesting as a case study as part of a larger course (e.g. software engineering class or a DSA course)

@@nicejungle And specifically a Merkle DAG

I think Prime's take on this is correct. There should be a class called "Version Control" where you learn about various version control tools and how they're implemented, then have to create your own version control tool as a final project.

You can make argument like that about other software - that's somehow beyond the point of the video, because Git status in software engineering shouldn't be the reason to learn its internals as a part of CS degree (compared to other pieces of software).

That's because it is. In a typical course assignment the scope is fairly limited and you only ever move forward and have very little use for version control.

That’s many, many things though. You don’t get expertise with any undergrad degree, you get the foundation to acquire expertise.

Why does something have to be taught? I swear students are fucking lazy. Go fucking learn it yourself

I'm sorry but if writing git commit and git push is too much for you, I can assume you won't put any thought into actual problems

@@avarise5607 If all you ever did was type git commit and git push, I can assume your empty repository didn't pass the course

@dstick14 for what the law currently is at least, every bill a pull request.

This might be an America thing because I can guarantee at least in my university we use gitlab so this video confuses me to no end.

Tracking issue for gay rights​@dstick14

I went to a community college over a decade ago and this was how we did things in many of my classes. I've always assumed that it was because a lot of the professors there either still worked in the field as engineers or at least manager or had recently retired so they just kept using the cools for the courses they taught that they used at work all the time. There's no good excuse not to.

Until you find the person who learned how to fork a branch.

When you apply for a job at our company you need to do a small project and supply the solution in a GIT repo.

You're expected to know Git these days. It entered the "why ask?" territory years ago.

I absolutely love your git videos. please keep making them

Alacritty+tmux+editor is win

tmux + nano ? Really people use that for development? Not NeoVim or Emacs? :D

**neovim

@@lukeskywalker7029 I could not be bothered with that yesterday, so I just added color highlighting to js-files in nano. You can also make scripts for jslint, but ofcourse its not as good as neovim or emacs lol, but its a small editor and easy to work with in those cases you only need to change a line.

I mean he was pretty clear that he doesn't strictly mean "IDE" by how he uses VS Code as the example and Notepad as the counter-example. I think "IDE" is to be read as "decent development environment", not "Eclipse or Visual Studio".

I have installed a TI-89 emulator on my smartphone, and of course to use it properly it required two books and some YT videos. It helped considerably in many classes, mainly linear algebra and coding theory.

@@NicolayGiraldo Nice! That's exactly what I used back in the day. It's how I learned RPN, and it got me thru many a math class.

I think that the structure of classes really contributes to students not wanting to learn. Once you get behind in classes, there is rarely if ever a chance to catch up if you have other commitments outside of your classes. When I was in college I'd always start a semester/qtr ahead, pushing class projects past where they needed to be with documentation, additional features, testing, etc. but by the end of the quarter, I consistently had to be satisfied with hitting the bare requirements and learning absolutely nothing more.

@@chriss3404 yes, the planning of the curriculum is quite problematic. For example, teaching network engineering, I was surprised one day to find out that many of the students saw the terminal for the first time in the networking lab course, as due to change in the study plans the unix basics stuff became optional. Naturally, this was a massive difficulty spike for the unprepared, and a total pain for us to resolve, as we could not just tell them to "get good".

I should elaborate that I think there is a gap between computer science and software engineering. If most CS graduates want to get a software engineering job, universities and higher education should focus on software engineering degrees. Unfortunately, computer science sounds more prestigious than software engineering.

At my university the different between software engineering and a CS degree is literally 2 classes. Every other class or curriculum of classes can transfer or counts towards either degree. The only difference is in CS you are forced to code an assembler and a compiler as a capstone project. As someone who doesn't ever want to make my own compiler for basically any reason I wish I would have done software engineering.

​@@ShootingUtahthere is a reason why the compiler matters. most of the work in advancing programming in the last 50 years or so has shown that domain specific languages are key to problem solving. this is basically what you do when you create an api, you extend the language to be better able to talk about your problem. the compiler part gives you an idea of how your bad api's can make that solution harder to implement, and more importantly, why. as a side effect it also n3eds proficiency in so many other types of programming that you would be hard pressed to find an alternative which still gave a framework for teaching all of those other aspects.

You are 100% wrong. From a guy that has been developing for 34 years. It is usually the CS types that are the most argumentative when they need to do the practical stuff to get the job done.

Also, academia is not "teaching what you have learned." Academics are not teachers. They are put into the position to teach simply because by default they have so much to teach and there need to be a way to keep them useful while they are not producing "knowledge" which is the actual description of what you do in academia. In any serious university, you will see that your professors use their right to go on sabbatical immediately when it is possible to finish up their real academic work.

​@@echorisesI would argue that while there is a component of tenure which is about generating new knowledge, if you are so dense that you cannot pass the surrounding context on to your students, you are not really competent to get tenure in the first place. it is also a well known and well documented fact that understanding a problem can be hard, but helping someone else understand it is even harder and more importantly a different skill set involved.

@@grokitall I agree with you completely. But I tend to draw a line between the reality of the situation and what the characteristics of academia should dictate to begin with. Academia was started to be seen a "job factory" because industries preferred that if there was a job factory, it should be rooted in higher education. This, in turn, caused academia to be more like the industries (especially in capitalist countries where education is actually an industry). But the requirements of both differs from each other greatly. In the end, you end up with professors who are neither precise enough to be considered tenured nor knowledgeable or fast-adapting enough to be in the industry. After all, underlying idea of the university is still them being the place to generate knowledge while being surrounded by people who seek to generate knowledge, not converting students into good workers. It is the industries' responsibility to come up with solutions to address working discipline. That is why, if I really need to hire a CS graduate, I realize that it is MY RESPONSIBILITY to nudge them towards learning git, IDE, etc. I will even take this further, I would be very suspicious of recently graduated people who are in their early-20s with both a higher education and industry knowledge if they were not programmers before they enrolled in university. I would take the person who immersed themselves in the university life, instead of the people who closed themselves in their rooms and learned stuff that are specifically required in the industry. Saying all that, I don't think "git" is an industry-specific tool. I took all my class notes while using git and I wasn't even a CS major. Git should be used by everyone who uses computers to do stuff.

@@echorises i agree version control is to important and useful to only be used for programming. i would much rather have a repository of useful txt files handled with version control, instead of having microsoft word trying to mishandle multiple copies of a binary word document which has been modified by multiple people. git is just the best version control client we have. unfortunately, higher education has little to do with generating new knowledge. it is mostly a certificate mill used to generate enough income to pay for teachers and administrators to have a job. even worse, in higher level education a certain amount of teaching is forced upon post doctoral students without them being g8ven any teacher training, while professors are jumping through hoops trying to get external funding to pay for a very limited amount of research, with most of the time being used with students and funding hunts. worse still, until you get tenure, and thus don't need to worry about having a job next year, your actual research wil be constrained by the university to those non controversial bits of the subject that will help you get tenure. only after getting tenure are you free within the funding constraints to actually do any research you want in what little free time you are given. with the possible exception of japan, no country has yet produced a system where there is a part of the university which takes the pure research, funds getting it to the point where it is usable by industry, and then licenses the technology to industry to generate revenue to fund the part which takes the pure research and develops it. at that point, your tenured professors would actually be being paid to do pure research combined with developing existing research into stuff usable by industry, while the untenured ones could use the university development fund to find research which would be funded by the university, would help towards tenure, and would be passing knowledge to students. the post doctoral students would still split the time doing work which the professors had got funded combined with teaching. i would say it should not be possible to get your degree without having to get a teaching qualification as part of it, as so much of the time of professors and post docs is forced to be spent on teaching. as to producing students fit for industry, that has never been part of the goals of universities. with the exception of Germany, no country has a system of general education which is not designed with the intent of filtering out those not fit for an academic career, and basicaly throwing away the rest. germany does actually have a second path, dealing with some vocational qualifications. however most education is designed to take those unsuitable for academia and turn them into nice quiet sheeple, which we just cannot afford any longer.

"degrees exist for the sake of academia" is for rich people with money to waste. The average joe doesn't have money to spend on a degree without relying on it being an investment into getting a good salary to pay off their debt. In the modern day knowledge is incredibly free and open on the internet; A university is where you go to get a piece of paper to prove you got knowledge so you can get a job, if you just want knowledge then you don't need to pay all that money.

They're approaching things from a new angle.

I like to use them both together the way you mentioned, the CLI is faster for most things but when making a large change I will review each line and optionally stage a hunk or line and make sure I am happy with what I am commiting which is easier to do in the GUI and kind of clunky when using interactive commit. If the change is fairly small then I'll just use the cli to run a diff and add the files and commit.

Mercurial isn't that fundamentally different to git from a usage perspective, if you know one the other is fairly familiar. If you don't know either or svn then it's a problem. Don't tell me you know clearcase or sourcesafe, you know nothing.

I'm not sure if they have to teach frameworks, as depending which field you'll enter, there are different frameworks expected. Why don't students skim through job posts and check requirements and then learn on their own? Back then we were told that university isn't school and you'll have to learn on your own as well. All the good devs at university coded in their free time and/or took on a side job. TBH if I get the feeling during an interview, that a candidate is not able to figure out what they need to learn on their own, that would be concerning for me.

Lmao, good catch

I'd add that to the 5%. Pal World dev is just wierd, but they obviously know what there doing with svn.

again, the exception. they all know how, just chose not too

@@ciarancurley5482 they claimed they used a bucket of usbs and no vcs at all

@@SnowTheParrot lmao no, they're absolutely insane for using a physical container of storage drives instead of version control software. Just because their hacked together game was wildly successful doesn't mean we should justify their crazy development practices.

i didnt even know such thing exists .

wait is there more than git cmd?????

git cmd sucks, not sure how people would use it. I use git in VSCode with gitlens/gitless, it's an amazing experience using it.

@@franciscogonzalez1879 dude there’s a whole ecosystem of git clients. To name a few common ones: Tower, Fork, GitKraken

Don't care for Git GUI, but the Visual Studio integration with Git is quite good, actually.

Well for a decent sized project, you absolutely need to use git. But the problem is that students need to be taught WHY git is necessary, WHY it was developed (Torvalds developed it because he hated using the VCS solutions of the past and wanted to address and solve the issues facing those softwares), and WHY having stuff like branches and merging branches etc. is necessary. And I also found out that there's not a single video on YT that does a proper job of telling you intuitively how git works, also not to mention the only way I found it useful is to work with VSCode and gitless/gitlens, without which I am seriously in bad shape for solving merge conflicts lol. I use git CLI only for commands.

In my university, you would have used git at least once, without understanding it But you would not need to touch linux/unix cli, database management, network protocols or heard of RESTful API before graduating.

Our university is teaching git along with basic ethics (fun stories of code that killed maimed or bankrupted). It's a required course prior to a collaborative coding project.

Because the way to get traction in KZfaq is say a sentence and put a lot of emphasis as if it is shocking and get a whole lot of camps for and against the topic. The next topic is peanut butter and jelly is good for sorting or not.

it's very easy as long you already know what is a directed acyclic graph, which every programmer should know too

@@nicejungle What if the people in question aren't programmers yet? They're students, they won't know most things yet, almost by definition.

@@amomchilov we're talking about graduate students. If in 4 years, you've never used git, it means you've never programmed and/or you've never used an opensource project on internet (everybody use git). It's a red flag

@@nicejungle since when were we talking about graduate students? This video talks about git being one of the first things all uni students should learn while learning to code.

@@amomchilov please watch the video

Education costing money is the real issue then. Education has its place as it's giving a framework to build upon. If you don't know what you don't know, things are getting hard. On the other hand education and lecturers are often lagging behind reality as often they are somewhat detached from the industry.

sounds like a skill issue to me

This is why I ONLY hired developers who don't know git. Git is only for developers who make mistakes and I don't want any mistakes in my codebase.

Depends on the context when you say that. git works on diffs. When you checkout a hash (the hash is the combined hash of the project state with author signatures and all that), git will calculate all the changes and recreate your code. If git were to maintain each file's version separately (as in whole files), you would see a lot more storage occupied from your .git folder.

@@SahilP2648 You are correct. A commit is a set of diffs. However, the git hash, tag and branch names points to a complete snapshot of the codebase. I will still confidently say that a commit is a set of diffs. The fact that the handle/reference/pointer that you use to access that commit points to a complete snapshot does not change that fact

@@harrytsang1501 like I said, git does not store your entire project's files as is, in that sense it is not a snapshot. When you checkout a hash then yes it restores all files within your root the way you want it to be, but git will always calculate the diffs and store them separately, never whole files, unless you add a new file to the project, only then it will store a new whole file.

@@harrytsang1501 So it is a set of diffs and OP is just being an annoying pedant? Cause I was real confused wtf they were talking about.

@@NihongoWakannai a git repo is a tree of diffs, yes. and any individual sha is a pointer to a node in that tree, and is a diff on top of the previous node. I am not sure why they'd say it's one or the other, and not both :P

It tells a whole lot about the student in question. Never having used git or other version control also means: 1. No engagement with the open source community at all 2. No interaction with any existing projects outside of university 3. Never worked together with people outside of your direct peers in university 4. Barely any engagement with the coding community at large - it's practically impossible to not stumble over git when you actually talk to people, read stuff, ... - the "hammer" analogy really fits.

@@_DATA_EXPUNGED_ 1. That's not necessary at all if by engagement with open source you mean writing code for open source. LOL 2. and 3. are essentially the same... Just because students haven't learned Git doesn't mean they have "No interaction with any existing projects outside of university". 4. Just because students haven't learned Git doesn't mean they don't know what it is. LOL

@jesse9996 Your response displays a significant lack of maturity. If you can't deal with disagreement, don't put your opinions out there for everybody to comment on. 1. No, not exclusively. Even such small things as downloading a repo from github, doing some small tweaks for yourself, etc - usually you are going to use git for that. 2. I'm not aware of a single significant project not using a VCS. It's just not a thing. Yesyes, some tiny exception probably exists somewhere - but the likeliness of a student randomly seeing them is rather low. 4. Oh sweet summer child, you have no idea... I've never seen such a high rate of utterly untalented, uninterested and curiosity-free young people who also assume they deserve a massive compensation for virtue of them being able to sit through a couple years of university regurgitating books. The most important traits are curiosity and general interest/passion and at least a decent coding ability, though the former 2 weigh more heavily. I have - so far - never had a person interview who was clearly passionate about their craft but didn't know at least git basics, it just doesn't happen. And _those_ are the people I want to hire. Passionate ones who love what they are doing and are willing to keep learning forever. In return, they get those massive salaries - not for their degree or pure existence though, instead for their good work. I've stopped hiring recent grads without at least a couple years experience (own projects count too if they can explain what they did well, of course), there's just no point. There's enough capable people out there right now, why would I take the risk and hire an uninterested "i just want the money" guy?

the point here is that there are a set of core technologies which are essential for being able to work on code in a modern context, most of which can e taught the basics of in less than an afternoon. structured programming used to be controversial, so was version control, and so is continuous integration. i would argue that you should not be able to graduate without being able to submit code, which implies knowing a language, producing a program, checking it into version control, and having it pass continuous integration. all of that can be taught in an afternoon using fizbuzz and the idea that you can spend four years learning advanced techniques without learning the basics of working in a modern high end environment should not be acceptable.

So was mine. We still had to turn in our homework using git and docker for more complex tasks.

I was in uni when Git was first released, so I graduated before it was popular. My group assignments involved a lot of .ZIP files with names like 'blah_FINAL_V2.zip'. Not even joking. Git would have saved so much time.

We used to email each other “final_final_assignment”

You should be able to clone a repository (from an arbitrary git server or anywhere on your computer) without having to look anything up. You should feel confident in that you could do everything you do from your gui without it but with the help of the git manual.

I'd say it doesn't matter. If you want to navigate git operations faster and make your workflow more efficient, learn the cli. If you expect you're going to be in a situation where you are working solely in a terminal with no feasible way to look something up, learn the cli. Otherwise, do what you want. I think the more important thing is to be confident that you could figure out how to interact with any (at least somewhat reasonably made) unfamiliar cli without necessarily having a reference.