What if it takes multiple commits to fix a bug? What if you need to commit to run against a build server? What if you want to switch away to a different branch to work on something else without losing where you're at?

It's one click to delete a branch (and it's a simple checkbox when we merge the pull request using Atlassian's git server product). And you don't have to push your changes out to other users or git servers. You can hold onto it on just your box until you're ready to make it available.

Zillions of branches isn't a problem in Git. They're trivial to create and delete. (delete doesn't destroy history, just hides the branch name so it doesn't show in your list of "existing" branches). That's the whole point. Everything is about branching and merging instead of a linear code history.

Git works well because of how the Linux project is structured - a very large hierarchy, but starts to fall down in a small team where people don't have that arms-length working environment, or where they work on multiple branches at the same time (eg at work, I have my big feature and I have bug fixes that come and go regularly - git doesn't help in that environment unless I have multiple repos checked out)

We've been using Git (with a centralized repo) very successfully with a small team and it has made stuff so much smoother than SVN. Mostly because it encourages branching and facilitates it quite well (compared to the monolithic branding in SVN).

Bug fixes? Create a branch per bug. Make your commits as you go. Commit if you need to (or use Git Stash) and switch to another branch. Easy-peasy. No need to have multiple checkouts. The workflow we've been using with a lot of success is to create a branch per bug/feature, and then use a pull request to get it reviewed and merged back into master.

If it's that clear cut, why all the uproar about Obama's birth certificate? Even on the off chance he had been born outside the U.S., he'd still be a Natural Born Citizen since his mother early was, correct?

Oh that's right - the deffinition is clearly one interpretation if you support Cruz and clearly the opposite interpretation if you oppose Obama.

That right there is pretty damn unclear.

Yes, we had numerous group projects in architecture and they sucked for the exact same reasons. And in the real world of architecture almost everything is effectively a group project.

I think the only thing the OpenSSL bug shows is how flimsy the underlying framework of the internet is. Most of the shit we all use, trust and take for granted was coded in someone's basement over the weekend a long time ago. All it takes is one clever guys to take a good look at the code to exploit it, and it's probably fair to say he'll be the only one to review the code ever...

It pays better to exploit the bugs...

I find a wonderful sense of schadenfreude every time I consider that Sears shut down their catalog sales only two years before Amazon launched.

Your allegory is fallacious because you are comparing a vendor not carrying a product which they never would (for any customer) to a vendor refusing to sell their primary product to a specific customer because the vendor finds that particular customer objectionable.

It is more akin to a Muslim butcher refusing to sell anything to a Jew.

There's no Shake Shack near me even though I'm in the 2nd largest market in the US and they've opened a location in Dubai.

I'm fucked.

See how stupid that argument sound?

I never said LLC = Incorporation.

A Limited Liability Corporation IS a type of corporation whereas the AC above claimed otherwise.

And that's exactly what Amazon and other online retailers have been complaining about in the U.S. cross-border sales tax collection attempts. 80 varitations? Try thousandsn with every state, county, and city having their own arbitrary sales tax rules and rates.

Yes. Because a Muslim storekeeper wouldn't be selling sell pork chops to anyone (halal and all that), just like I, a web developer, don't sell pink fuzzy slippers to anyone. Distribution of pork chops is not the business your exampled shopkeeper is in.

It would be quite illegal if the Muslim storekeeper was selling pork chops to everyone else, but refused to sell pork chops specifically to Jews.

The specificity is what makes it discrimination, and in the US we have very clearly defined which basis of discrimination are not permitted: religious affiliation, age, gender, race, handicaps, medical conditions, and now sexual orientation is being added to that list.

Pro tip: look up the words that make LLC an acronym

Yet they're bombing ISIS.

The whole reason Firefox exists is because a group broke off and built it to remove the feature bloat in Mozilla/Netscape.

Officially-built/supported plugins would be the ideal way to solve this. Use internal devs who know the app inside and out, but serve it as an optional extension rather than an always-available feature requiring more memory to keep running.