I've been invited to Infusion's Sleepless in NY training weekend. 

This sounds like a fun little trip, getting to hang out with some geeks, including one of my personal heroes, Carl Franklin.  SharePoint is a good technology, and while I'm not personally overly excited about it compared to other technologies (like Silverlight), this is free training, and it's a great opportunity to network and get my name out there a little. 

And who knows?  Maybe I'll bring home the grand prize, "Insomniac, the developer's machine that never sleeps..."

Today I'm 1D in hexadecimal, which I prefer because it makes me look like I'm still a teenager.  Or 11101 if you prefer binary.  Let's just not talk about how old I am in decimal, okay?

Alright, I'll put it this way...  The hippie adage is "Never trust anyone over 30."  Which means you can only trust me for another 366 days.

This is my first post since starting my new job.  I've been a smidge busy, as they threw me in immediately on a high-profile project utilizing Microsoft Office SharePoint Services, and, well, my working knowledge of MOSS was somewhere between zip and zilch.  That's changed significantly over the past few weeks, and while I've been hesitant to call myself a MOSS developer, I'm certainly getting my bearings and starting to kick much ass.

One problem our team has run into several times is source code control.  Pretty much everybody on the team was a SourceSafe user and didn't have any experience with SVN.  I initially balked at this, because, well, SourceSafe sucks.  I advocated SVN every chance I got, particularly when SourceSafe would eat somebody's changes or we fought over file contention. 

As luck would have it, the company is in the process of standardizing on SVN, and, when our VSS repository became obviously too corrupt to be much use, the technical architect on this project caved to my requests and we switched to SVN.

The problem with this is, SVN's Copy-Modify-Merge paradigm can be confusing for developers who are used to Lock-Modify-Unlock.  We've had several occurrences of changes mysteriously disappearing, and, since I'm the de facto SVN expert on the team, it was left to me to reconstruct exactly what happened.  To avoid naming names and pointing fingers, I’ll illustrate with Alice and Bob…

Let’s start with a file.  We’ll call it Text.txt.  Text.txt looks like this:

Alice and Bob both did an update and now have Revision 1 as their working copy.

Alice makes some changes and commits them.  She removes the line “Baz” and adds “42” and “Don’t Panic”.  She commits her changes as Revision 2.

Bob, meanwhile, makes some changes of his own.  Working with Revision 1 as his base, he adds “Quux”

Before committing, Bob does an update and realizes he has conflicts.

Now, what I think happened, is Bob made a mistake while merging, and chose to accept his entire conflict block as the merge output…

Bob then marked his conflicts as resolved and committed this as Revision 3.

The problem with this is that it negates Alice’s changes – She removed “Baz”, and she added “42” and “Don’t Panic”.  The next time Alice did an update, she updated to Revision 3 and the changes she previously made in Revision 2 were missing.  SVN gets blamed, making Cam look bad for being such a vocal SVN supporter, when it was really Bob’s fault.  (The “making Cam look bad” part was a joke.  Smile.)

What Bob should have done was take a good look at the differences between Revision 2 and his working copy…

…and asked himself, “what exactly did I change in my working copy?”  In this case, Bob did one thing and one thing only: He added “Quux”.  So Bob has to assume that any other changes to the file were done for a reason.  Somebody wanted “Baz” removed, and “42” and “Don’t Panic” added.  It’s then incumbent upon Bob to ensure that only his valid changes are included in the merge.  The resulting file could have looked like this:

The moral of the story:

Copy-Modify-Merge (like SVN) is more powerful than Lock-Modify-Unlock (like SourceSafe), but, as Uncle Ben Parker told Peter Parker, “With great power comes great responsibility.”  When you merge and commit, you have some responsibilities to live up to:

Update frequently.

When you merge, be sure you are not removing someone else’s important changes, and that you are only merging in the changes that you made that are relevant. 

When you commit, always read the file list to ensure you are not inadvertently committing changes to a file you did not mean to modify.  Also, it helps to do a diff of each file in the file list to be sure you are only committing code changes you mean to commit.

Good luck!

Well, not really.  Not in the flesh, anyway.

A few months ago he and I exchanged Wii Friend codes.  Nothing happened.  Months went by, and I spent less time with my Wii and more time with my Xbox 360.  Then my wife turned on the Wii to play Twilight Princess, and, lo and behold, we have a visitor.  Here's a shot of my Mii hanging out on Mii Plaza with Scott Hanselman's Mii.

Not a bad Mii, Scott.  But which is the better likeness;  Your Mii, or your avatar from A Conversation with Scott Hanselman?

I just got my first greenlit article on the social news site, Fark.com.  For those of you unfamiliar with Fark, what this means is I submitted a link to a news article, including a self-written funny headline, and the users of the pay version of the site (TotalFark) gave it sufficient votes to have it show on the front page of Fark.

I guess you'd have to be there to appreciate it.

Yay, me.

For almost seven years, I have been very proud to count myself as an employee of Commerce Bank.  Circa 2003 or so, I started to establish myself as the go-to guy for all things web technology-related in the bank as I took over primary responsibility as the lone developer on many of Commerce's retail Internet and intranet applications.  I was very successful in that role, and over the past few years, Commerce gave me the opportunity to lead the effort to move Commerce Bank's online banking development away from Corillian's professional services division and into our own development house.  With a great team of developers, QA testers, and project leaders, we succeeded with flying colors.  I put in many long days and had a great deal of fun, both in terms of technical problems and interpersonal interactions.

Then, one day a few weeks ago, I realized that I wasn't finding any joy in it anymore.  I was burnt out.  I haven't entirely pinpointed why.  There is a feeling of needing a new challenge, like I've done all there is for me to do at Commerce.  There's some minor dissatisfaction with finding clear direction for me to grow my career.  And, to be truthful, there's probably a little wanderlust, a need for a change in scenery.

Whatever it was causing my funk, it wasn't getting any better, so I acted on it.  And so it is with a mixture of regret, trepidation, and excitement that I announce that I have resigned my position at Commerce Bank as of July 11.

I have accepted a position as an Associate with the RiverPoint Group, taking a contract engagement with a local interactive media company.  This company has a reputation as one of the best environments for developers in the KC area, and has been named one of the best places to work in the country.  I'm thrilled that I get to experience that environment, and I'm looking forward to meeting the new challenges that are sure to come.

At the same time, I'm very, very nervous about my decision.  Commerce is all I've known for seven years.  I'm very comfortable there.  Everyone knows me.  I have a reputation as a guru on a range of topics.  I've put much of myself into our online banking system and our development process.  I consider my coworkers at Commerce to be my closest friends and family.  As excited as I am, all of this makes it very hard to let go.

However, I'm (mostly) confident I've made the right choice, and I know that, win, lose, or draw, this whole experience is something I have to do to understand what I'm really capable of and where I really fit in the developer community.  As my mom says, for every door that closes, another opens.

So, grieving over the end of this era be damned, I have to boldly stride forward and meet this challenge head-on.

Wish me luck.

I'm very hopeful that Silverlight will achieve the market penetration of Flash.  Silverlight has so much going for it, like the DLR, the mini-CLR, XAML-based development, and so much more.  And like I said in an earlier post, it's a great example of people in Microsoft getting it, what with the multi-platform support.

The only thing that worried me about Silverlight was the lack of Linux support.  Like it or not, Linux is becoming a viable desktop platform, so it's important that Silverlight have some kind of Linux implementation.  I had heard somewhere that Miguel de Icaza had stated that he was going to have a Mono-based implementation of Silverlight ready by the end of 2007, but I didn't know if that was a reasonable estimate.

Somehow, I think I underestimated the Mono team.  Miguel and his band of crazy coders hammered out a more-or-less functional implementation of Silverlight, called Moonlight, in 21 days.  Holy freakin' cow, that's cool.

I'd also like to point out that Miguel mentions receiving guidance from Scott Guthrie and others in Microsoft.  I'm floored by this.  They're apparently that interested in making it succeed.

There's been a lot of chatter lately about the so-called Alpha Geek, and his perceived exodus away from .NET.  This strikes home for me, because I'm an Alpha Geek who is madly in love with .NET as a platform.  I see and understand some of the new "in" languages and platforms for Alpha Geeks (particularly Ruby and Ruby on Rails), but really, I'm just not all that interested right at the moment.  Scott Hanselman talks about the beauty of Ruby, but I see just as much poetic beauty in well-written C#.  And when you consider the great things coming out of Microsoft lately, like WPF, WF, WCF, etc., and the great things coming soon (Orcas, Silverlight, Acropolis, LINQ), .NET is such a compelling platform.

But this whole TestDriven.NET thing has got me concerned.  For the unfamiliar, a major contributor in the open source community is getting leaned on hard by Microsoft for a perceived violation of the Visual C# Express EULA.  Basically, he made an add-in that supports all versions of Visual Studio, including the Express SKUs.  And Microsoft's lawyers claim that distributing add-ins for the Express SKUs is a no-no. 

This is already creating a significant chilling effect throughout the community, and is undoubtedly going to push a lot of people away from .NET too.  It's a shame, too, because the development tools teams in Microsoft clearly get who their strongest supporters are.  Look at all the great ways Microsoft has engaged the developer community:  Codeplex, Channel 9, shared source projects like the ASP.NET Ajax Control Toolkit, supporting Silverlight on multiple platforms, and more to come.  They know that when the Alpha Geek feels engaged and empowered, he will evangelize the platform for them.  But the lawyers don't get that;  And to be completely fair, Microsoft's legal department can't be selective about EULA enforcement, or they lose much of their power in cases of genuine EULA violations. 

It sucks for everyone.  It sucks for the people in Microsoft who are watching their good will in the developer community get pissed away by the soulless lawyers, it sucks for open source developers like Rob Conery and Jamie Cansdale, but most of all, it sucks for the Alpha Geek who can do nothing but stand by and watch the train wreck unfold.