All my work is on code I don't own and isn't public facing. I can't take our proprietary code, wrap it up, and put it on GitHub. I also can't provide logins to our proprietary systems for employers to look at.
I certainly hope a resume remains relevant for people in my position, because it's really all I have.
> Yes, "show me the github" is one of the worst trends for software developers' careers.
On the other hand, there are benefits to posting code online that they can review. Instead of spending hours writing code for each company that you're interviewing with, you can just write code that you're actually interested in and throw it online.
Say you're talking with 20 companies. Each of those 20 interviews have an associated overhead of 3 hours (if you're lucky): 1 hour screening call, 1 hour technical call, 1 hour live coding call. So 60 hours of screening, versus writing some code that might actually be usable by others in the future.
Don't be afraid to say no to live coding interviews. Unless you have nothing to show :-).
Some people are completely useless. Remember, there are people out there who can't write Fizz Buzz yet still apply for jobs. They can easily fake a GitHub.
Someone who won't write code upon request is an instant no-hire.
> Some people are completely useless. Remember, there are people out there who can't write Fizz Buzz yet still apply for jobs. They can easily fake a GitHub.
So you're saying they can use git-filter-branch, but not write Fizz Buzz? Sounds fishy to me.
>Instead of spending hours writing code for each company that you're interviewing with, you can just write code that you're actually interested in and throw it online.
Maybe, but I bet you'll still have to spend hours writing to code in order to prove that you wrote and understand the code, rather than copying it.
"... there are benefits to posting code online that they can review..."
In most domains, code is proprietary. Few ask for code samples because unscrupulous interviewees could reveal proprietary code, potentially opening the company to legal liabilities.
I make it a point not to read code that interviewees supply because I don't want to be sued by XYZ company because of code theft. In my industry, it has happened many times. Google "Sergey Aleynikov" and "Misha Malyshev" for an example of what can happen.
I've met total posers that can whip up the little snippets that people have time for in an interview... and I've met great coders who crash and burn a live code session due to interview stress.
I've consistently found open-source code to be a much better sample since the person being interviewed is not under such pressure when writing it. And yes, the pressure from being in a room with 3 ppl watching you is very different from "deadline pressure" to complete a task when employed.
I don't think the github resume is going to be the standard for quite awhile, but I know it makes my job when hiring much easier when we can discuss code and techniques used in an open-source project the interviewee wrote, than arbitrary questions that only prove he's recently memorized an algorithm book.
The real thing developers should think about, is the competition. This is what made "has college degree" an easy filter for employers. If you have 800 applications, tossing the ones missing a github repo in addition to the college degree trims it down a bit more.
Will you miss some possibly great people? Absolutely. Same with the college degree filter. But you'll still likely end up with a bunch of "would like to hire" candidates and it'll be easier to see what their work actually looks like. If you're applying for a job, you should absolutely consider how to stay ahead of the competition, and I'm sure companies in the future when bombarded with so many applications will add things like this to the resume filter.
I've been in similar positions but one note: do you really work 100% on proprietary software? If you've used any open source projects you can demonstrate skill solely through high quality bug reports for the tools you use, even if your main code is closed. I've certainly seen people participating in e.g. Linux, Python, Apache, etc. threads which made it clear they were solid developers.
Comments
All my work is on code I don't own and isn't public facing. I can't take our proprietary code, wrap it up, and put it on GitHub. I also can't provide logins to our proprietary systems for employers to look at.
I certainly hope a resume remains relevant for people in my position, because it's really all I have.
Yes, "show me the github" is one of the worst trends for software developers' careers.
I'll always ask for live code from people at interviews, if only to filter out the total posers.
> Yes, "show me the github" is one of the worst trends for software developers' careers.
On the other hand, there are benefits to posting code online that they can review. Instead of spending hours writing code for each company that you're interviewing with, you can just write code that you're actually interested in and throw it online.
Say you're talking with 20 companies. Each of those 20 interviews have an associated overhead of 3 hours (if you're lucky): 1 hour screening call, 1 hour technical call, 1 hour live coding call. So 60 hours of screening, versus writing some code that might actually be usable by others in the future.
Don't be afraid to say no to live coding interviews. Unless you have nothing to show :-).
Some people are completely useless. Remember, there are people out there who can't write Fizz Buzz yet still apply for jobs. They can easily fake a GitHub.
Someone who won't write code upon request is an instant no-hire.
> Some people are completely useless. Remember, there are people out there who can't write Fizz Buzz yet still apply for jobs. They can easily fake a GitHub.
So you're saying they can use git-filter-branch, but not write Fizz Buzz? Sounds fishy to me.
>Instead of spending hours writing code for each company that you're interviewing with, you can just write code that you're actually interested in and throw it online.
Maybe, but I bet you'll still have to spend hours writing to code in order to prove that you wrote and understand the code, rather than copying it.
"... there are benefits to posting code online that they can review..."
In most domains, code is proprietary. Few ask for code samples because unscrupulous interviewees could reveal proprietary code, potentially opening the company to legal liabilities.
I make it a point not to read code that interviewees supply because I don't want to be sued by XYZ company because of code theft. In my industry, it has happened many times. Google "Sergey Aleynikov" and "Misha Malyshev" for an example of what can happen.
The common thread of this sample (N=2) seems to be that they are Russian.
Therefore, don't interview any Russians and you should be safe!
I've met total posers that can whip up the little snippets that people have time for in an interview... and I've met great coders who crash and burn a live code session due to interview stress.
I've consistently found open-source code to be a much better sample since the person being interviewed is not under such pressure when writing it. And yes, the pressure from being in a room with 3 ppl watching you is very different from "deadline pressure" to complete a task when employed.
I don't think the github resume is going to be the standard for quite awhile, but I know it makes my job when hiring much easier when we can discuss code and techniques used in an open-source project the interviewee wrote, than arbitrary questions that only prove he's recently memorized an algorithm book.
The real thing developers should think about, is the competition. This is what made "has college degree" an easy filter for employers. If you have 800 applications, tossing the ones missing a github repo in addition to the college degree trims it down a bit more.
Will you miss some possibly great people? Absolutely. Same with the college degree filter. But you'll still likely end up with a bunch of "would like to hire" candidates and it'll be easier to see what their work actually looks like. If you're applying for a job, you should absolutely consider how to stay ahead of the competition, and I'm sure companies in the future when bombarded with so many applications will add things like this to the resume filter.
I've been in similar positions but one note: do you really work 100% on proprietary software? If you've used any open source projects you can demonstrate skill solely through high quality bug reports for the tools you use, even if your main code is closed. I've certainly seen people participating in e.g. Linux, Python, Apache, etc. threads which made it clear they were solid developers.