Hire the best Git developers

Git is an open-source distributed version control system for tracking and managing revisions of computer files. Git takes a distributed approach to version control, allowing multiple developers to branch projects off a master repository so that they can make changes on their local machines. When developers are ready to push those changes to production, they can commit them to a staging area where they’ll be able to merge them with the master branch. Git is the most popular method of tracking changes in source code during software development.

The first step to determining the cost to hire a Git developer will be to define your needs. Rates can vary due to many factors, including expertise and experience, location, and market conditions.

Cost factor #1: project scope

The first variable to consider when determining scope is the nature of the work that needs to be completed. Not all Git projects are created equally. Hosting a small git repository on cPanel will typically take less time than managing the Bitbucket repository for a large enterprise app.

Tip: The more accurately your job description describes the scope of your project, the easier it will be for talent to give you accurate cost estimates and proposals.

Cost factor #2: Git developer experience

Choosing the right level of expertise for the job is closely tied to how well you determined the scope of your project. You wouldn’t need an advanced Git developer for a simple single-page application (SPA). On the other hand, creating and maintaining your own social media platform will require a skilled developer to effectively manage your remote repository.

Beyond experience level, you need to consider the type of experience the talent possesses. It’s important to note that “Git developer” is a bit of a misnomer. In truth you will likely be looking for some other type of developer (e.g., Android, iOS, web) who happens to know Git. The following table breaks down the rates of the typical types of Git developers you can find on Upwork.

Rates charged by Git developers on Upwork

Cost factor #3: location

Location is another variable that can impact a Git developer’s cost. It’s no secret that you can leverage differences in purchasing power between countries to gain savings on talent. But it’s also important to factor in hidden costs such as language barriers, time zones, and the logistics of managing a remote team. The real advantage to sourcing talent remotely on Upwork is the ability to scan a global talent pool for the best possible person for the job. Location is no longer an obstacle.

Cost factor #4: independent contractor vs. agency

The final variable regarding talent cost is hiring an independent contractor vs. an agency. An agency is often a “one size fits all” model, so you’ll often have access to a designer, a project manager, an engineer, and more. When hiring individuals you have total autonomy regarding who is responsible for which part of the project, but you’ll need to source each of those skills separately.

The trade-off between hiring individuals vs. hiring an agency is the level of administrative overhead you incur personally in coordinating tasks among all members of the team. Project scope and personal preference will determine which style is a better fit for your needs.

Committing directly to master: Committing to master has become a running joke within the developer community. Everyone has a commit-to-master story where they or someone else broke a build or caused a problem by committing bad code to the master branch. As a general rule you should only commit to master by merging a development branch that is stable, tested, and ready for deployment. The idea is to commit all code changes to your own local branch and merge only once you’re sure those changes are validated.

If you need to roll back to the previous branch but don’t want to lose all the work you did accidentally committing to master, you can branch your current progress to save that work before rolling back the master branch to its previous version with the hard git reset command:

Not resetting keys and passwords after pushing sensitive data: Imagine accidentally uploading an SSH key or password to your repository through an accidental commit. You might think that all you have to do is remove that commit with a rebase or reset, followed by a force push to master. However, force push doesn’t actually delete the commit; it creates a new one and moves the file pointer to it. You can still access the old data via SHA-1. If you try to avoid this leak by manually deleting your .git folder you risk messing up the repositories of other developers on the team who might have pulled the latest changes. Moreover, your data was already exposed for an unacceptable period of time. This is why the most elegant solution is to simply update your keys after patching the leak in your remote repository.

Committing generated files: Generally speaking, you should commit only manual code to a repository. If a file is generated from your code it can be difficult to apply the line-based diff tracking used by Git. This normally powerful tool for tracking changes can become a major headache when it becomes difficult to separate the manual code changes that matter from the code changes that resulted from code-generated files. It also complicates contributions to your library from other developers, as they might make changes to the generated files rather than the source code itself. Their contributions could easily disappear the next time the build is run.

Keep commits clean, concise, and single-purpose

It can be all too easy to make large meandering commits that address multiple features and bugs in a single push. The problem with this approach is that other developers may find it difficult to understand your changes when they’re all lumped together in a single commit. Git is supposed to make it easier to work with a distributed team of developers. The larger that team is, the more important it becomes to keep your commits small and focused. Single-purpose commits streamline code reviews, simplify rollbacks, and make tracking changes with your ticketing system easier.

Commit early and often

You only really start to see the real benefits of a version control system like Git when you commit early and commit often. Think of it as saving your progress with periodic checkpoints as you code. This makes it easier to ensure each commit compiles and/or passes regression tests. The only exception may be for large public projects, where you don’t want to overwhelm contributors with an excessive number of commits. In this case your commits may be more substantial, but they should still follow a general theme that makes sense and tells a story about the logical progression of your project.

Write detailed comments on your commits

Git requires you to write a comment for every commit. The idea is to be detailed and concise, capturing the purpose behind every code commit. The more descriptive you make these comments, the easier it will be to track bugs and figure out where your build went wrong when you encounter an issue in a future commit. It will also make it easier for a team of developers to collaborate on a project.