Chandra Prasath’s Post

Most people learn Git like this git add → git commit → git push That’s not Git. That’s just… surviving. Here’s what actually makes you stand out as an intern/fresher 👇 🔹 1. Your commits are communication, not checkpoints “fix”, “update”, “done” tells nothing. Instead: → fix: resolve null pointer in login flow → feat: added frontend index structure Future you (and your team) will thank you. 🔹 2. Commit ≠ Push (this confuses a lot of people) Commit = local save Push = making it visible to others No push → your work doesn’t exist for your team. 🔹 3. Always pull before you start working If your local code is outdated, your push will fail or create conflicts. Pull early → avoid chaos later. 🔹 4. Branches are not optional Working on main directly is risky. Use: feature/login-page fix/navbar-bug Small branches = easier merges, fewer conflicts. 🔹 5. git stash is your “oh no” button Mid-feature and suddenly need to switch tasks? git stash → saves your unfinished work git stash pop → brings it back later 🔹 6. Merge conflicts are not errors Git is just asking: “Two people changed the same thing… what should I keep?” Stay calm. Read both sides. Decide. 🔹 7. Never blindly use git push --force On shared branches, this can break things for everyone. If you must, use: --force-with-lease 🔹 8. Pull doesn’t remove conflicts — it shifts them earlier Syncing with main during development helps you resolve issues in your branch, not at the final merge. Git isn’t about commands. It’s about working without breaking things for others. The devs who stand out aren’t the smartest. They’re the ones teams can rely on. What’s one Git mistake you made early on? 👀 #Git #GitHub #SoftwareDevelopment #Developers #LearningInPublic

𝗚𝗶𝘁 𝗹𝗼𝗼𝗸𝘀 𝘀𝗶𝗺𝗽𝗹𝗲. 𝗨𝗻𝘁𝗶𝗹 𝗶𝘁 𝗱𝗼𝗲𝘀𝗻'𝘁. The first command I learned weas 𝗴𝗶𝘁 𝗰𝗹𝗼𝗻𝗲. Then 𝗴𝗶𝘁 𝗮𝗱𝗱, followed by 𝗴𝗶𝘁 𝗰𝗼𝗺𝗺𝗶𝘁, and 𝗴𝗶𝘁 𝗽𝘂𝘀𝗵. And just like that i oushed my first line of code, my first tought was "this is so easy", and for a while, that's all I've used it was enough. It became an instict 𝗮𝗱𝗱 -> 𝗰𝗼𝗺𝗺𝗶𝘁 -> 𝗽𝘂𝘀𝗵, almost automatic. Then I ran into a bug and tried 𝗴𝗶𝘁 𝗿𝗲𝗯𝗮𝘀𝗲 for the first time. I had no idea what I was doing. I couldn't fix it. I couldn't undo it, all i have read was don't never use the -𝗙 flag. So I didn't, instead I did what any reasonable beginner dev would do — I deleted the entire repo and started over. After that, Git stopped feeling like a tool and started feeling like a ticking bomb. I was thinking 10 times before every single git push, terrified of breaking something I couldn't fix. That fear? Completely self-inflicted. And completely avoidable — if someone had just told me what I was doing wrong. I've made pretty much every Git mistake you can make. Some of them multiple times. Some of them I'm honestly still making today. Here are 5 of them — swipe through, and share with us the Git mistakes YOU made in the comments #Bit #DevLife #SoftwareEngineering #LearningToCode #FullStackDeveloper

I thought I knew Git… until someone in my team broke production with one command. 😅 No syntax error. No logic bug. Just one wrong command. And suddenly: ❌ Code disappeared ❌ Branch was messy ❌ Panic kicked in That’s when I realized: 👉 Knowing Git commands is easy 👉 Understanding Git behavior is everything Most developers use Git daily… but only a few actually understand it. Here’s the mindset shift that helped me 👇 🔹 Daily commands are your foundation Check → Stage → Commit → Pull → Push Simple, but skipping one step can cost hours. 🌿 Branches are your safety net Never experiment on main. Create → Merge → Clean up. Your future self will thank you. ⚡ Advanced commands = control Stash when you’re switching context. Cherry-pick when you need precision, not chaos. 🚨 Mistakes are part of the job Reset → when you want to erase Revert → when you want to fix safely Knowing when to use each matters more than knowing the command. 💡 The real truth: Git isn’t just version control. It’s your undo button, backup system, and collaboration engine — all in one. The difference between a beginner and a confident developer? 👉 Not how they write code 👉 But how they recover when things go wrong If Git has ever confused you, broken your flow, or saved your day… You’re doing it right. 😉 Which Git command do you still double-check before running? 👇 #Git #SoftwareEngineering #Developers #BackendEngineering #Programming #TechCareers #CodingJourney

Git isn’t hard. It’s just misunderstood. Most devs memorize commands. Few understand the model. 👉 Snapshots 👉 Pointers 👉 HEAD That’s it. Once this clicks: reset isn’t scary rebase isn’t risky mistakes aren’t permanent If Git still feels like a gamble: 👉 https://lnkd.in/giREAq6Q

That moment when you get serious... git add . git commit -m '|' The blinking cursor. The empty message. The temptation to just type "fix" and move on. We've all been there. But here's what nobody says about that precise moment: An empty or rushed commit message is debt. Debt you'll pay in 3 months, 6 months, 1 year. When you're looking for WHY that line changed. When a teammate tries to understand your reasoning. When you need to revert and don't know what to touch. Your Git history tells a story. You decide whether that story is readable or incomprehensible. What every serious developer should apply: 📌 The Conventional Commits convention ✅ feat: add a new feature ✅ fix: correct a specific bug ✅ chore: update dependencies ✅ docs: improve documentation ✅ refactor: restructure without changing behavior ✅ test: add or modify tests ✅ perf: improve performance The ideal structure: type(scope): short and precise description Concrete examples: → feat(auth): add JWT refresh token rotation → fix(payment): resolve duplicate charge on retry → refactor(api): simplify error handling middleware Simple rules: → Use the present imperative   "add" not "added" not "adding" → No capital letter at the start → No period at the end → Maximum 72 characters → Explain the WHY in the body   if the title isn't enough A good commit message answers one single question: "If someone reads this in 1 year with zero context — do they understand exactly what changed and why?" If the answer is no — rewrite it. Your Git history is the living documentation of your project. Treat it that way. 🧠 💬 Do you follow a commit convention in your projects? Which one and why? #GentilMaliyamungu #GentilLeNoiR #GentilDeveloper #Git #Programming #CodeLife #WebDevelopment #SoftwareEngineering #Backend #Tech #LearnToCode #100DaysOfCode #Africa #DevLife #CleanCode

That moment when you get serious... git add . git commit -m '|' The blinking cursor. The empty message. The temptation to just type "fix" and move on. We've all been there. But here's what nobody says about that precise moment: An empty or rushed commit message is debt. Debt you'll pay in 3 months, 6 months, 1 year. When you're looking for WHY that line changed. When a teammate tries to understand your reasoning. When you need to revert and don't know what to touch. Your Git history tells a story. You decide whether that story is readable or incomprehensible. What every serious developer should apply: 📌 The Conventional Commits convention ✅ feat: add a new feature ✅ fix: correct a specific bug ✅ chore: update dependencies ✅ docs: improve documentation ✅ refactor: restructure without changing behavior ✅ test: add or modify tests ✅ perf: improve performance The ideal structure: type(scope): short and precise description Concrete examples: → feat(auth): add JWT refresh token rotation → fix(payment): resolve duplicate charge on retry → refactor(api): simplify error handling middleware Simple rules: → Use the present imperative   "add" not "added" not "adding" → No capital letter at the start → No period at the end → Maximum 72 characters → Explain the WHY in the body   if the title isn't enough A good commit message answers one single question: "If someone reads this in 1 year with zero context — do they understand exactly what changed and why?" If the answer is no — rewrite it. Your Git history is the living documentation of your project. Treat it that way. 🧠 💬 Do you follow a commit convention in your projects? Which one and why? #GentilMaliyamungu #GentilLeNoiR #GentilDeveloper #Git #Programming #CodeLife #WebDevelopment #SoftwareEngineering #Backend #Tech #LearnToCode #100DaysOfCode #Africa #DevLife #CleanCode

Today I stopped “using Git” and actually understood it. Most of us think: 👉 `git commit` = save changes 👉 `git merge` = combine branches But in production, it’s way deeper. A commit isn’t just a save button — it’s a snapshot of your project’s entire state, with a unique identity (SHA). It builds a timeline you can trust, debug, and even roll back under pressure. And merge? It’s not just combining code — it’s reconciling histories. When multiple developers ship features, Git intelligently connects parallel timelines, handling conflicts where logic overlaps. Realization: Clean commits = clean debugging Clear branching = smooth collaboration Good merges = stable production Git isn’t just a tool — it’s your project’s memory. Now I don’t just commit code… I commit clarity. #Git #DeveloperJourney #SoftwareEngineering #LearningInPublic #FullStackDeveloper

Most developers don’t understand Git. Yes — even the ones using it daily. They can: commit, push, fix conflicts But ask them what actually happens during a rebase… and things get fuzzy. That’s the problem. Git isn’t a list of commands. It’s a system of snapshots + pointers. And until you understand that: reset feels dangerous rebase feels risky mistakes feel permanent When the truth is: 👉 Git is one of the most forgiving tools you use 👉 You’re just not using it that way I broke this down simply in my Git Mastery Series — no jargon, no fluff. If Git still feels like something you “handle carefully”: 👉 https://lnkd.in/giREAq6Q

I lost an hour fighting git stash today. And no, it wasn't Git's fault. 😅 The scenario: I had changes in a branch I didn't want to commit there, saved them with git stash, switched branches, did a merge, switched again... and on git stash pop, conflicts everywhere. Why? Because the stash is not per branch. It's global. It doesn't care where you created it — it applies on top of the current state of the code, and if anything changed in between, Git just says: "I have no idea what you're talking about". What I learned: - git stash is not meant for traveling between branches with changes - For that, use a WIP commit: git commit -m "WIP: temporary changes, do not merge" Much more predictable. Much less drama. Sometimes the most expensive lesson is the one that sticks the most. #git #LinusTorvalds #GitTips #devlife #opensource #webdevelopment

Git merge 🤝 vs. Git rebase 🔁 — which one do you reach for? Most developers know both exist, but the real question is: when to use which? Merge · Preserves complete history · Shows exactly when branches joined · Safe & explicit — no rewriting Rebase · Keeps a linear, cleaner history · Easier to read git log · Rewrites commits — use with caution 🚨 Golden rule: Never rebase public or shared branches. Only rebase local/unpushed work. I'm still learning the balance myself. Some days I prefer merge for clarity, other days rebase for that clean history. Which one do you lean on? And what's your rule for choosing? 👇 --- What's your go-to for integrating changes? 🔘 Merge 🔘 Rebase 🔘 Depends on the situation --- #Git #GitRebase #GitMerge #DevCommunity #CodeNewbie #VersionControl #CodingJourney #TechLearning #DevOps #AzureDevOps #GitHub