On Mon, Feb 29, 2016 at 10:45 PM, Byron Smith <[email protected]> wrote:
> Not really on topic here, but maybe we should be teaching learners `git
> reflog show` [1]. Everyone messes git up sometimes; Checking the reflog is
> often the best fix when that happens.
>
> On the other hand, the output of `reflog show` is confusing. It would
> certainly be a distraction and no one would fully understand what they're
> seeing. ...But you teach skydivers how to release the parachute before you
> teach them how to pack it.
I was going to bring this up as well. I think showing reflog to new
users seeing git for the first time. But it's too bad--to Terri and
others who wrote about the pain felt when making a mistake in git,
short of `rm -rf .git`, almost any other mistake you make in git can
be fixed with a quick look at the reflog, and then `git reset --hard
'HEAD@{N}'` where N is typically the number of commands ago that you
messed up :)
Erik
> On Mon, Feb 29, 2016 at 4:00 PM, Terri Yu <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> Dealing with git is a huge pain. When I screw something up in git, I have
>> to take a deep breath, look things up on StackOverflow, and double check all
>> my commands, so that I don't break something. The only reason I learned it
>> was because I had to learn it to contribute to open source projects. And
>> when I try to help newbies make their first open source contribution, the
>> biggest roadblock is always git. When I used version control for my solo
>> research project, I used mercurial. Mercurial is not just for small
>> projects. Python uses mercurial for their open source project. Facebook
>> recently started using Mercurial instead of Git [1].
>>
>> Terri
>>
>> [1]
>> https://code.facebook.com/posts/218678814984400/scaling-mercurial-at-facebook/
>>
>> On Mon, Feb 29, 2016 at 3:51 PM, David Martin (Staff)
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>> We spend about 50 contact hours teaching our undergraduates the basics of
>>> R. Even that is not enough. It has been said that you need 100 hours to
>>> reach competency, and 1000 hours to master a subject. And the next stage is
>>> 10,000 hours to be an expert..
>>>
>>> How much time has he invested in actually learning those skills? I was
>>> totting up the time we spend teaching X versus the amount of complaints we
>>> get that the students don't know X. There is a strong inverse correlation.
>>> Folk want a cheap easy fix and have been promised that with computers. It
>>> does exist but it has to be earned. You don't get cheap and easy for free.
>>>
>>> Dr David Martin
>>> Lecturer in Bioinformatics
>>> College of Life Sciences
>>> University of Dundee
>>>
>>>
>>> ________________________________________
>>> From: Discuss <[email protected]> on behalf of
>>> Lex Nederbragt <[email protected]>
>>> Sent: 29 February 2016 20:43
>>> To: Software Carpentry Discussion
>>> Subject: Re: [Discuss] RajLab: From reproducibility to
>>> over-reproducibility
>>>
>>> Hi all and thanks for the many responses.
>>>
>>> My feeling reading this post was about tools (partly echoing Greg): 'we'
>>> know 'all of us' should use the appropriate tool, e.g. version control (is
>>> that what you call the moral high-ground?). But for the novice, these
>>> tools/methods have steep learning curves, thus high upfront time investment,
>>> and no immediate benefit (!!!). There is a burden on 'us' to convince
>>> 'others' of the need to invest time to adopt these tools.
>>>
>>> I am not sure whether more convincing (how? Research-based evidence?) or
>>> training is the answer, versus much easier to learn and use tools.
>>>
>>> Lex
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Discuss mailing list
>>> [email protected]
>>>
>>> http://lists.software-carpentry.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss_lists.software-carpentry.org
>>>
>>> The University of Dundee is a registered Scottish Charity, No: SC015096
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Discuss mailing list
>>> [email protected]
>>>
>>> http://lists.software-carpentry.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss_lists.software-carpentry.org
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Discuss mailing list
>> [email protected]
>>
>> http://lists.software-carpentry.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss_lists.software-carpentry.org
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Discuss mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.software-carpentry.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss_lists.software-carpentry.org
_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.software-carpentry.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss_lists.software-carpentry.org
