The one beef I have with the "my github page is my resume" meme is that many developers work in spaces where they do not have the ability to work with open source much. I personally have years of work checked into github in private repos, and if I showed it to a potential employer I could be sued into oblivion. Many of us work on very sensitive systems with loads of legal walls around them. Sure, I contribute to OSS in my spare time, but my public github profile is not even close to a fair representation of my professional work.
`And code on GitHub gives no insight into how someone might fit into a company culture.`<p>github does give you this insight if you look at how the person participates in discussions in the issue tracker and code reviews. remember github's old moto, social coding? i think the author is hung up on the coding part and missing the social part.
This is a rant. They must not have much worth sharing on GitHub.<p>These days if I interviewed 2 developers and one had a very nice resume full of recommendations and stories about successful projects and the other developer had an active GitHub account with their own active projects with many watching them as well as multiple accepted Pull Requests for other projects... I would easily lean toward the developer who has been actively writing code, sharing and interacting with other developers. It shows they have passion, drive, dedication and an eagerness to learn from others and contribute back to the community.<p>A fancy resume cannot replace all of that.
A few internet-years ago the same was said about having a blog. And then there was a tidal wave of low SNR blogs created by developers employed by offshoring companies looking for an edge. If this article gets traction - github will likely see the same. Be careful what you wish for.<p>To be honest, from my own modest mountaintop of being 35, (gainfully employed and programming since 14 somewhere in the depths of your typical enterprise) I suddenly find myself repeating the words of others from long ago when I first started in the field (though now I can relate) - look at this as yet another fad: same as those blogs, same as the linkedins and twitters...<p>I'd like to volunteer that I, though not having contributed to any open source projects, nor published any of the code that I have worked on (it obviously being proprietary to the company I work for), nor having any interest to blog my many unremarkable opinions along with already overbearing gaggle of "experts" - still, am not entirely uninterested and apathetic towards programming, nor devoid of useful engineering skill and reliable experience accumulated over lengthy career. But you won't believe me.
Github is absolutely replacing resumes. It doesn't replace an interview, which is what the author seems to be getting at despite the title of their article...
I've done a couple of interviews recently for a C++ developer role, none had GitHub pages. It didn't negatively effect them, they were rated on their strengths from their CV's, interview and a take home programming task but I'd have loved to have seen at least one repo of work.<p>You don't necessarily need to be using GitHub to produce OSS to the level of something like Rails, but even a micro library would have awesome. It gives you just a little bit more data to look at when you're considering options.
I find resumes pretty efficient - I can look them over, and make a snap judgement wrt which ones are worth a phone screen, which aren't. Over many years of doing this, I find a good correlation between first impression and subsequent candidate quality (meaning, I've had to interview folks where the resume screamed "no hire"). Stuff like coherent formatting, brief narrative and concise, useful explanations of roles and technologies are, believe it or not, quite beyond some people.<p>The thought of trawling someone's repo instead, having to take the time to get an in depth evaluation of what the code's doing and whether that's effective makes me shudder. But then perhaps people doing this just make a first impression of the code, rather than a deep understanding?<p>Honestly I can see a GitHub being a "nice to have", but certainly not the main deal.<p>Out of interest, anyone else that's been hiring in the UK seeing any traction with GitHub? I'm in a pretty enterprisey space, and past clutch of CVs we've had haven't so much as mentioned it.
For reference, here's my article claiming the opposite: <a href="http://code.dblock.org/github-is-your-new-resume" rel="nofollow">http://code.dblock.org/github-is-your-new-resume</a>
>A resume and a GitHub account provide different kinds of quantitative data. Replacing one with the other means you’re throwing out good information. They complement each other and work best together, like hot fudge and ice cream.<p>He's constructing a bit of a straw man here. I haven't heard anyone suggest that traditional resumes should be completely abandoned, or that a Github account should be the <i>only</i> factor when hiring a developer.
Github is totally replacing resume. But resumes will always be necessary to scale-up career beyond code-monkey to consulting and semi-management roles.
This is why I'm incorporating a bio page into the Silvrback blogging platform. There needs to be something better than linkedIn and Github for showing work/accomplishments. Especially if your interests are diverse. My example bio page: <a href="https://www.silvrback.com/dsowers/bio" rel="nofollow">https://www.silvrback.com/dsowers/bio</a>
Given how often resumes are given little more than cursory review (keyword scanning, etc.), I wonder how many companies using GitHub as a screening tool actually take the time to thoroughly review the candidate's work.<p>Everybody talks about code, but software is about more than code. When looking at a candidate's GitHub repo, is any consideration given to the quality of documentation, if it even exists (which it often doesn't), and how easily a project can be built and used? How many employers actually build and use a candidate's software? Some developers write gorgeous code but gorgeous code != great, usable software.