Can't say anything about perforce as I've never used it, but I'd give my left nut to get Google's Piper instead of git at work :)

Piper's syntax is Perforce syntax.

I moved to Google from Microsoft and back when employee orientation involved going to Mountain View and going into labs to learn the basics, it was amusing to see fresh college hires confused at not-git while I sat down and said "It's Source Depot, I know this!"[1]

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dFUlAQZB9Ng

I concur. I miss citc & fig.

Actually curious - where have they? Zuck's claim didn't seem to be true. I'd imagine a few places that have low technical acumen have tried, but I'll want to see how much they pay for SWEs willing to clean that codebase after they let LLMs run amok on it.

Stubby calls (at least in Java) just use something called a GenericServiceMocker which is akin to a more specialised mockito.

Bit late to the party, but it looks like the author created a "framework" that allows for extremely rapid development of the simplest kind of CRUD app. Everything is fine and dandy as long as nothing needs to change, or if it needs to be changed, then the changer is the author themselves.

I applaud the author for their intellectual pursuit, but I don't think it's fair to compare this to codebases where one does not simply pass the POST request body into the database.

That's not necessarily the case, depending on how their pipeline was set up and what their VCS supports.

For example, you can always `git mv` the Java file to the Kotlin file and only then transform it, which keeps your history.

That keeps the history but not the annotations of the lines. Git blame will shows basically all lines as last changed by Kotlin transform.

This should be short enough to read: https://github.com/Artamus/git-split/

It's not a good implementation of ownership tags, unfortunately :(

Couldn't flutter work as public-first that then gets vendored into third_party? Or is that literally the fork strategy you are talking about that I'm too dense to understand?

Yeah, that's what I meant. Public-first is good in some ways, but it means some bugs might be discovered rather late.

What did it say?

Sorry for the less-than-useful reply, but I tried out most of the TEA TUI frameworks in OCaml and none of them worked very well or well updated.

I do not recall what problem I had with that particular one, but I ended up just using raw Notty in the end.