128
  • Facebook does not use Git due to scale issues with their large monorepo, instead opting for Mercurial.
  • Mercurial may be a better option for large monorepos, but Git has made improvements to support them better.
  • Despite some drawbacks, Git usage remains dominant with 93.87% share, due to familiarity, additional tools, and industry trends.
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] villainy@lemmy.world 24 points 5 months ago

The inhouse tooling from the massive tech companies is very cool but I always wonder how that impacts transferrable skills. I work in a much smaller shop but intentionally make tech decisions that will give our engineers a highly transferrable skill set. If someone wants to leave it should be easy to bring their knowledge to bear elsewhere.

[-] ByteOnBikes@slrpnk.net 13 points 5 months ago

Speaking from my own experience and a few other seniors I work with, you try to recreate solutions you like at those smaller shops. It may not be identical, but you know what's possible.

I came into a company that didn't have a system to manage errors. At my old job, errors would get grouped automatically and work can be prioritized through the groupings. The new company only handled errors when they saw it, by word of mouth.

Immediately went to work setting up a similar system.

[-] senkora@lemmy.zip 8 points 5 months ago

There’s also a whole industry of ex-Googlers reimplementing Google tooling as SaaS services to sell to other ex-Googlers at other companies.

There’s even a lookup table: https://github.com/jhuangtw/xg2xg

(some of those are open source projects, some are SaaS services)

[-] UFODivebomb@programming.dev 6 points 5 months ago

Absolutely does. Source: worked for Amazon.

[-] lud@lemm.ee 3 points 5 months ago

The inhouse tooling from the massive tech companies is very cool

I agree. I personally know nothing about tooling like this but I went through the tooling used at rockstar for example GTA V and it was very cool to how much they have automated and made tools easier to use.

[-] sukhmel@programming.dev 1 points 5 months ago

Made easier to use like in when their codebase was leaked and no one had successfully built a game from it?

in-house tools often encourage making a mess heavily reliant on those tools or working around their limitations, in my experience

[-] lud@lemm.ee 2 points 5 months ago

People have successfully compiled GTA V if that is what you are saying.

Of course no one would make another game using leaked tools, that would be incredibly stupid.

[-] sukhmel@programming.dev 1 points 5 months ago

No, that was what I meant, I thought they didn't, I was wrong, it turned out

[-] lud@lemm.ee 2 points 5 months ago

Yeah, people successfully compiled and ran the game within a few days of the leak.

I tried myself but I didn't get it to work. But I'm no developer and I tried doing it in a VM (no way those files touch my real computer) which was annoying so I gave up quite quickly.

[-] sukhmel@programming.dev 2 points 5 months ago

Oh, it impacts indeed. And I would expect that to be partially to keep the devs from hopping away, as they will have a hard time transferring

On the other hand, onboarding is longer and wastes more time and money of the company ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

this post was submitted on 18 Jul 2024
128 points (97.1% liked)

Programming

17668 readers
183 users here now

Welcome to the main community in programming.dev! Feel free to post anything relating to programming here!

Cross posting is strongly encouraged in the instance. If you feel your post or another person's post makes sense in another community cross post into it.

Hope you enjoy the instance!

Rules

Rules

  • Follow the programming.dev instance rules
  • Keep content related to programming in some way
  • If you're posting long videos try to add in some form of tldr for those who don't want to watch videos

Wormhole

Follow the wormhole through a path of communities !webdev@programming.dev



founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS