> Anybody who's judging you by the state of your repos clearly doesn't understand that coding is iterative and happens better in the open, and is probably safe to ignore
Counterpoint: I applied for a job a few months ago which required a coding sample. I listed a link to a project of mine on GitHub. Rather than commenting on that project, they instead found another repo under the same account -- an open source project I started 6 years ago, but had not returned to since -- and told me they weren't happy with the quality of the code they saw represented there, which killed my application.
I was annoyed. That wasn't a project I had looked at in some time, and I don't feel it represents my best work. It was just a proof of concept that I hoped to later refine. But it cost me an employment opportunity.
Counterpoint: I applied for a job a few months ago which required a coding sample. I listed a link to a project of mine on GitHub. Rather than commenting on that project, they instead found another repo under the same account -- an open source project I started 6 years ago, but had not returned to since -- and told me they weren't happy with the quality of the code they saw represented there, which killed my application.
I was annoyed. That wasn't a project I had looked at in some time, and I don't feel it represents my best work. It was just a proof of concept that I hoped to later refine. But it cost me an employment opportunity.
I deleted the public repo.