23 comments
i do have a github, but i don't think i would call it "good": https://github.com/mmcru?tab=repositories
i can definitely improve it, and that is something i have been working on. thanks for the advice though; i really appreciate it. i agree with you that ideally i would be working under some more senior programmers to improve my skills.
i can definitely improve it, and that is something i have been working on. thanks for the advice though; i really appreciate it. i agree with you that ideally i would be working under some more senior programmers to improve my skills.
I just took a look - I noticed you've got a couple of websites in your list of repositories. Why not host some of these on a personal website?
Also, adding a README could help people understand what the scope and goal of each project is (and also help them figure out how to use it/test it).
Also, adding a README could help people understand what the scope and goal of each project is (and also help them figure out how to use it/test it).
I also took a look at your contributions - looks a bit spotty!
https://github.com/mmcru
No activity in the last month? Something I personally would pick up on.
https://github.com/mmcru
No activity in the last month? Something I personally would pick up on.
C'mon.. No activity in the last month is not a big deal. On my github[1] I have periods where I go for months without committing a single thing, and then I'll have a flurry of activity in the course of a week.
People have lives outside of coding and sometimes they go a month or two (or 6) without pushing anything to github, it's not the worst thing in the world. I mean we're looking for quality of contributions here, not quantity, right? To me a bigger 'red flag' would be that all the django code seems to use function based views (not class based views) and doesn't really have any consistent formatting. OP I'd suggest skimming two scoops of django[2] and reading PEP8[3] so that you can get a good idea of how most shops write their code. Either way, I think your projects are mostly great and show that you're actually able to build things.
[1] https://github.com/philangist
[2] http://twoscoopspress.org/products/two-scoops-of-django-1-5
[3] http://legacy.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0008/
People have lives outside of coding and sometimes they go a month or two (or 6) without pushing anything to github, it's not the worst thing in the world. I mean we're looking for quality of contributions here, not quantity, right? To me a bigger 'red flag' would be that all the django code seems to use function based views (not class based views) and doesn't really have any consistent formatting. OP I'd suggest skimming two scoops of django[2] and reading PEP8[3] so that you can get a good idea of how most shops write their code. Either way, I think your projects are mostly great and show that you're actually able to build things.
[1] https://github.com/philangist
[2] http://twoscoopspress.org/products/two-scoops-of-django-1-5
[3] http://legacy.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0008/
wow, awesome response, thanks for the information. i actually bought two scoops of django for 1.5, only to read that they released an updated version about a week later! i'm not sure how out-of date the 1.5 version is, but i'm going to pick it back up. when i first read it, i felt like some of it went over my head at the time.
definitely going to read up on PEP8. thanks again!
definitely going to read up on PEP8. thanks again!
Github contributions & open source is not a "white male only" affair. I don't know if you're trolling, but you're actually lowering the bar for women which is a massive disservice.
Good coders spend time outside work keeping up to date on their skills - trying stuff out. This stuff needs to go somewhere. Why not put it in github and show me that you're regularly learning new things?
Also, "pick up" meaning I would notice. I'm not saying I expect to see a 365 day streak or anything, but I would expect to see a fair few contributions from people looking to switch from ops -> dev as they hone their skills.
In short, IMHO people that try and fail over and over until they get it right are much more likely to be good coders, than those with one or two totally pristine repos they committed to years ago.
Good coders spend time outside work keeping up to date on their skills - trying stuff out. This stuff needs to go somewhere. Why not put it in github and show me that you're regularly learning new things?
Also, "pick up" meaning I would notice. I'm not saying I expect to see a 365 day streak or anything, but I would expect to see a fair few contributions from people looking to switch from ops -> dev as they hone their skills.
In short, IMHO people that try and fail over and over until they get it right are much more likely to be good coders, than those with one or two totally pristine repos they committed to years ago.
I assume this was meant to be a response to me, even though it's not in the correct thread. I'd suggest you read the article I linked to, since it addresses each of the points you made fairly directly - with data and references, rather than empty assertions. It was also written by a woman, who would likely take issue to the claim that it's doing a disservice to women by pointing out discriminatory hiring practices.
It was yes, my mistake.
I read your link and it was a snoozefest, and I'm not really sure twitter posts count as references.
People want to see your code before they hire you. Github is a place to share code. That's it really - white male or not.
This is especially relevant to OP because he doesn't have commercial experience coding. Most interviewers will be nervous of this, a large portfolio accessible in a familiar format will alleviate much of their tension.
Don't forget, most interviews for the interviewer are basically an ass covering exercise. Nobody wants to be remembered as "the person that hired THAT guy".
I read your link and it was a snoozefest, and I'm not really sure twitter posts count as references.
People want to see your code before they hire you. Github is a place to share code. That's it really - white male or not.
This is especially relevant to OP because he doesn't have commercial experience coding. Most interviewers will be nervous of this, a large portfolio accessible in a familiar format will alleviate much of their tension.
Don't forget, most interviews for the interviewer are basically an ass covering exercise. Nobody wants to be remembered as "the person that hired THAT guy".
I was actually referring to the multiple listed references at the bottom of the article you "read." There are several other ways to see someone's code than expecting them to do work that they aren't getting paid for. Being "nervous" about people that don't do work for free perpetuates inequality. Try to see past your privilege and perhaps you won't hire "THAT guy."
yappy(2)
Basing hiring decisions on open source contribution rates contributes to the homogeneity (read: white maleness) of the industry at large. Women especially may not have as much time to contribute, since they are likely getting paid 30% less than their male counterparts and are more likely to be single parents than men. Ashe Dryden has a great breakdown of the issue, as well as some suggested alternative hiring techniques: http://www.ashedryden.com/blog/the-ethics-of-unpaid-labor-an...
This isn't a criticism of your comment, just something to keep in mind when making hiring choices. :)
This isn't a criticism of your comment, just something to keep in mind when making hiring choices. :)
> Women especially may not have as much time to contribute, since they are likely getting paid 30% less than their male counterparts and are more likely to be single parents than men.
I don't know if that's it. The undergrad population in the CS department when I was in college was 11% women (already pretty dismal) but when it came to code-heavy advanced courses like writing an operating system it dropped to 0%.
I would guess they either didn't believe they could do it or they were unwilling to put in the extra work, which in a sense was 'unpaid' since it was not a requirement for graduation. None of these women had children or had to worry about pay discrepancies.
I don't know if that's it. The undergrad population in the CS department when I was in college was 11% women (already pretty dismal) but when it came to code-heavy advanced courses like writing an operating system it dropped to 0%.
I would guess they either didn't believe they could do it or they were unwilling to put in the extra work, which in a sense was 'unpaid' since it was not a requirement for graduation. None of these women had children or had to worry about pay discrepancies.
Holy shit.
Unwilling to put in the extra work. REALLY??
Hi have we met
Unwilling to put in the extra work. REALLY??
Hi have we met
> None of these women had children or had to worry about pay discrepancies.
Every woman has to worry about pay discrepancies. In every industry, at every job level. That's what this whole "gender pay gap" is all about, you know?
And it's everybody's job to fix this!
Every woman has to worry about pay discrepancies. In every industry, at every job level. That's what this whole "gender pay gap" is all about, you know?
And it's everybody's job to fix this!
Am I correct in assuming that your assertion here is that women don't contribute to Open Source in as high a number as men because they're "unwilling to do the extra work?" This is based on your one experience in college, and its extrapolated gross generalizations. Did you happen to survey 11% of your classmates to determine their specific circumstances? Were there, perhaps, any other offerings of those same classes which you did not attend that might have had female students?
My assertion is that women shied away from this sort of unpaid time-intensive work even when they were not subject to the disadvantages you outlined (childcare and lower income). The real reason, in my opinion, must be something else.
In response to your questions: there was a single offering of the course. All of the women I encouraged to enroll said they were uninterested due to the perceived difficulty and workload. This may or may not have been a cover due to other concerns ("am I good enough?", "I heard only boys take this course", etc.). To be clear, the vast majority of men in CS were also unwilling to enroll in this course because of the workload.
In response to your questions: there was a single offering of the course. All of the women I encouraged to enroll said they were uninterested due to the perceived difficulty and workload. This may or may not have been a cover due to other concerns ("am I good enough?", "I heard only boys take this course", etc.). To be clear, the vast majority of men in CS were also unwilling to enroll in this course because of the workload.
Well, I would have to disagree with your assertion that the women were not subject to any disadvantages, even the ones I mentioned. To know that outright would require something bordering on omnipotence. But feel free to believe that it must have been "some other reason," rather than the myriad entrenched disadvantages that exist in both our society at large and this industry in particular.
Private Repo activity doesn't show up though, so it's not the best metric to take a look at.
you're definitely right. unfortunately i've been busy with a move and learning angular, which was new to me, so i haven't had much new code. i plan on adding more this week. thanks for your advice =]
I already code for a living and thus my github often goes dormant for months or even years. I also code on my free time too and many of the projects I might contribute to for free (important to stress that), or otherwise become involved in, do not accept pull requests on github.
I would like to offer you some counter-advice: don't work for an employer who bases hiring decisions solely on your github activity or any other open source contributions. These are important metrics but so is your own research, your genuine enthusiasm for the field, and your personality fit.
I would like to offer you some counter-advice: don't work for an employer who bases hiring decisions solely on your github activity or any other open source contributions. These are important metrics but so is your own research, your genuine enthusiasm for the field, and your personality fit.
Some easy things you can do is get an avatar, star some projects and try to get some followers (people often follow back if you follow them). Not huge wins, but they help make you github account look more active.
You have to remember that its not just them testing you - it's you testing them. As a newbie coder you want to be in a good team where you can learn good practices from solid performers.
I mean put it this way - if you were in a team and everyone was at a low skill level, do you think you'd get a good time of things from sales/marketing/all the other stakeholders?