git Memes

The Four Stages Of A Code Review

The Four Stages Of A Code Review
Every code review starts with righteous indignation. "Why would anyone write it this way?" Then you read it again. "No seriously, WHY?" By the third pass, you're questioning your own sanity. Finally, enlightenment hits: "Oh, that's why." Turns out the original author was dealing with some cursed edge case, a legacy system from 2003, or a database that returns null when it feels like it. The journey from "this is garbage" to "actually, I would've done the same thing" takes about 15 minutes and three cups of coffee. Bonus points if you end up apologizing in the PR comments.

He Did No Commit Or Stash In Local

He Did No Commit Or Stash In Local
Imagine casually typing git reset --hard thinking you're just tidying up some build artifacts, only to watch in ABSOLUTE HORROR as your entire day's work evaporates into the void like it never existed. No commit? No stash? Just raw, unfiltered chaos and the soul-crushing realization that you've basically just deleted your own existence from the timeline. That smile? That's the smile of someone who's transcended pain and entered a realm of pure, unfiltered acceptance. The build was failing anyway, right? Who needs those 8 hours of code? Not this guy! He's living in the moment now—a moment with ZERO uncommitted changes because they're ALL GONE FOREVER.

Git Add All Without Updating The Gitignore

Git Add All Without Updating The Gitignore
You know that sinking feeling when you casually run git add . and suddenly realize you just staged 47GB of raw training data, node_modules, and probably your entire .env file? Now you're watching your terminal crawl through uploading gigabytes to GitHub while your upload speed decides to cosplay as dial-up internet. The "51 years" is barely an exaggeration when you're pushing datasets that should've been in .gitignore from day one. Pro tip: always update your .gitignore BEFORE the git add, not after you've committed to your terrible life choices. And if you've already pushed? Time to learn about git filter-branch or BFG Repo-Cleaner, which is basically the "oh no" button for git repos.

It Do Be Like That Sometimes

It Do Be Like That Sometimes
You know that brief moment of peace when your massive PR gets approved without conflicts? That's the calm before the storm. Because the real code review happens in Slack DMs where your coworkers suddenly remember they have "thoughts" about your architectural decisions. The merge button is just the midpoint of your emotional rollercoaster. First panel: pure anxiety wondering if anyone will actually approve your 47-file monstrosity. Second panel: euphoric relief when it merges cleanly. Third panel: existential dread when the notifications start rolling in and everyone's suddenly a software architect with opinions about your variable naming. Pro tip: Turn off Slack notifications before merging. What you don't know can't hurt you... until the daily standup.

A Random Tech Bro

A Random Tech Bro
Linus Torvalds, the guy who actually revolutionized computing with Linux and Git, works from what looks like a normal person's home office with a standing desk and basic setup. Meanwhile, your average tech bro needs a triple-monitor RGB-infested battlestation with studio lighting and a gaming chair that costs more than Linus's entire desk just to push commits to a React tutorial repo. The contrast is *chef's kiss*. One guy literally changed how the world writes software and runs servers. The other makes TikToks about his "coding setup" and hasn't merged a PR in weeks. Priorities, right?

They Locked Me In A Room A Rubber Room

They Locked Me In A Room A Rubber Room
When someone questions your sanity for having 229 commits and 213 additions on master, but you're just sitting there knowing you're not the crazy one. It's everyone else who's insane for not committing directly to master with reckless abandon. The cat's defensive posture perfectly captures that moment when you have to explain your workflow choices to the team. Feature branches? Pull requests? Code review? Those are for people who don't live dangerously. You've transcended such mortal concerns and achieved enlightenment through chaos. The git stats in the terminal just add that extra layer of "yeah, I did that" energy. 229 commits straight to production because you're built different.

Average Open Source Contribution

Average Open Source Contribution
Someone out here preaching about fighting corporate aggression through open source contributions, then their "contribution" is literally changing "390 million" to "395 million" in a README file. That's it. That's the revolution. The diff shows they updated OpenOffice's download stats by 5 million users. Not fixing bugs, not adding features, not improving documentation in any meaningful way—just bumping a number that'll be outdated again in like three months. Truly the hero open source deserves. Meanwhile, maintainers are drowning in actual issues and PRs, but sure, let's spend time reviewing your stat update. This is why "first-time contributor" PRs have such a... reputation.

The Stack Hub Be Like

The Stack Hub Be Like
GitHub is all professional and polished, looking like it just stepped out of a corporate photoshoot. StackOverflow is giving you that knowing smirk—it's seen some things, answered some questions, probably roasted a few newbies who didn't format their code properly. Then there's your actual code, which looks like it was drawn by someone having a fever dream during a hackathon at 4 AM. The reality is that your GitHub repos look pristine with their README files and organized commits, while StackOverflow solutions seem elegant and well-thought-out. But when you actually open your codebase? It's a Frankenstein's monster of copy-pasted snippets, TODO comments from 2019, and functions named "doTheThing2_FINAL_actuallyFinal_v3". The gap between what your code looks like in your head versus what it actually is could fit the entire JavaScript ecosystem in it.

I Believe It's Still Not Fixed But I Don't Care

I Believe It's Still Not Fixed But I Don't Care
The five stages of grief, git edition. Starts with "Fixed bug" (4 files changed, clearly overthinking it). Then "Actually fixed bug" (2 files, getting more confident). By commit three it's "Fixed bug frfr no cap" because apparently we're peer-pressuring ourselves into believing our own lies. Then comes the manic "BUG FIXED!!!!" with just 1 file—either genius-level simplicity or complete delusion. Final commit: "it was not" (2 files). The makeup gets progressively more unhinged, which tracks perfectly with the mental state of someone who's been staring at the same bug for six hours. We've all been there. Ship it anyway.

The Stack Hub Be Like—

The Stack Hub Be Like—
GitHub sits there looking all professional and composed with its version control and CI/CD pipelines. StackOverflow is giving you that knowing smirk because it's seen every cursed question you've ever asked at 3 AM. And then there's your actual code—a beautiful disaster that somehow combines the worst parts of both copy-pasted solutions from SO and those "temporary" commits you swore you'd clean up before pushing to main. The real horror is that your codebase is literally a Frankenstein's monster stitched together from Stack Overflow answers, each solving one specific problem but creating three new ones when combined. GitHub hosts it with a straight face while StackOverflow keeps providing the organs for your creation. Meanwhile, your code is just vibing in production, held together by duct tape, prayer, and that one function nobody dares to refactor because "if it works, don't touch it."

Devin Got Fired

Devin Got Fired
Someone named Devin on the team got fired, and the devs decided to immortalize the moment by removing the @ts-expect-error comment that was basically saying "yeah TypeScript will yell at you here, but trust me bro, it works." The deleted comment is pure gold though: "DEVIN, STOP REMOVING THIS LINE YOU DUMBASS, YES TYPESCRIPT DOES THROW AN ERROR IF YOU DON'T HAVE IT, NO THIS IS NOT 'UNUSED', AND YES YOU HAVE BROKEN OUR CI PIPELINE EVERY TIME YOU DO IT" You can almost feel the rage of whoever wrote that after Devin broke the build for the third time in a week. Poor Devin probably thought they were being helpful by "cleaning up unused code" without understanding what @ts-expect-error actually does. Now that Devin's gone, the comment can finally be removed... because there's no one left to keep removing it. RIP to the CI pipeline's most frequent visitor.

When You Have To Checkout The Master Branch

When You Have To Checkout The Master Branch
Remember when everyone used "master" before the great renaming to "main"? Yeah, those legacy repos are still out there, lurking in production like ancient artifacts. You're working on your feature branch, everything's modern and clean, then someone asks you to check something on master and suddenly you're transported back to 2019. The branch still works perfectly fine, but saying "git checkout master" feels like you're about to get cancelled by your CI/CD pipeline. It's like finding a working floppy disk drive in 2024—technically functional, but you feel weird using it.