this comes across poor. it makes you sound more like The drummer on a Roman galleon, than someone leading other developers towards a goal. if a perspective developer adds value to your company and your product, but happens to care about things like source control, there may be really good reason why. if you dismiss that because of "we need to ship" then I'd propose that you might have tunnel vision and lack the EQ to value perspectives other than your own.
It's not the best comment i ever wrote, but I never said I'd dismiss devs caring about source control. I said that a series of questions like that suggest that the dev might care too much about stuff like that to the detriment of other stuff.
If you keep shipping and growing but don't make your internal tooling and processes better, you're going to grind to a halt. If you only make your internal tooling an processes better but not shipping, you're also going to grind to a halt. My argument is that you need a lot of the first and a bit of the, latter. An applicant who nearly only asks detailed technical questions about internal stuff, and makes me defend our decisions when we're not ticking off all the hypes du jour, suggests to me that we're not on the same page wrt where that balance should lie. Yes, we iterate on that stuff. No, not fulltime.
In fairness it wasn't a jab, but an objective observation. There were no personal attacks, merely suggestions based on observation. If we can suggest that an attentive list (where we've yet to define if a fictional candidate would expect all items to be addressed) means inherent expectations, it's reasonable to make the same kind of suggestions on your take.
I get where you’re coming from, but keep in mind we were talking about the candidate bringing an exhaustive list of such questions. In such a scenario it’s reasonable to suspect the candidate cares more about technical process than providing value for customers.
