4 ms·

Isn't it the whole idea of git to make user independent from place like github? After all if you have the repository on your local machine you can continue work

by 6d6b73 10y ago

Isn't it the whole idea of git to make user independent from place like github? After all if you have the repository on your local machine you can continue working as if nothing happened, right?

dudul 10y ago
Build server (e.g. CircleCI, Travis, etc), reviewing/merging pull requests, accessing 3rd party library READMEs. You know, doing software stuff.
- 6d6b73 10y ago
  Most of this stuff you should have locally, and not depend on 3rd party websites.
  - Klathmon 10y ago
    I'm so damn tired of the "host it locally" mentality. Not everyone has the resources to host all of that locally. For example, most open source projects. But even outside of that, we use github for issue tracking, the new project management kanban stuff, a CI server, reading documentation (which is offline, but the online versions are nicer on the eyes), and a ton more. Not to mention that StackOverflow and other discussion forums tend to be used by many. Yes you can host all of that locally, but we don't have a few hundred thousand a year to spend on some sysadmins to maintain all of that, and we don't have the time or money to run the machines, vet the software, and keep it up more reliably than github does for next to nothing.
    - 6d6b73 10y ago
      And I'm so damn tired of people complaining about cost to run stuff locally. The true cost of not having some basic stuff setup locally, even for backup purposes is when situation like this happens. It does not take long time or resources to download all of the libraries, with corresponding docs to a local server, or even your laptop. It is not complicated to have all of the new issues sent to an email to have a version of them available at all times. And you don't need a sysadmin to administer all of that.
      - Klathmon 10y ago
        >And you don't need a sysadmin to administer all of that. I disagree with that. If you have a server, you need a sysadmin. End of story. Who is going to secure the system and setup ssh keys? who is going to run updates? who is going to monitor for security issues? who is going to run backups? who is going to secure those backups? who is going to oversee the installation of the network, the battery backups, the racks, the server hardware, etc... Who will swap out bad disks? Who will recover the system when it goes down? Who is going to double the hardware and setup high availability (remember, you are competing with github for uptime here)? And god help you if you have one guy that does all of this. What happens if he gets hit by a bus? An on-prem server isn't a "backup", it's a liability. And without the resources to maintain it, it's going to become a nightmare. I've been there, and I won't ever do it again. I'm either going to pay to do it right, or give it to someone who will. And if that means a few hours of downtime every year or so, then that's a wonderful tradeoff for me. > It does not take long time or resources to download all of the libraries, with corresponding docs to a local server, or even your laptop. It is not complicated to have all of the new issues sent to an email to have a version of them available at all times. Luckily github (and alternatives) provide all of that. It sends us emails and slack messages on everything, so if it's down, we can still read, and we all have our local repos. But reading is different than working.
        6d6b73 10y ago
        If you have any substantial business, you already have a sysadmin on your team. He's not doing his job if he has no local versions of almost everything that is online. He should be staging everything locally, before deploying to the cloud. The currently very popular way of deploying everything live, without any testing, or staging is one of the reasons behind current crappy state of the internet.
        prefect42 10y ago
        I disagree, with very large companies, you have no "local" sysadmin, and no local versions of anything. Especially if your IT department is actually its own company.
forgottenpass 10y ago
Isn't it the whole idea of git to make user independent from place like github? Yup. But the whole point of GitHub is to make you dependent on GitHub. They've been slightly successful.

by 6d6b73 10y ago

Isn't it the whole idea of git to make user independent from place like github? After all if you have the repository on your local machine you can continue working as if nothing happened, right?

dudul 10y ago

Build server (e.g. CircleCI, Travis, etc), reviewing/merging pull requests, accessing 3rd party library READMEs. You know, doing software stuff.

6d6b73 10y ago
Most of this stuff you should have locally, and not depend on 3rd party websites.
- Klathmon 10y ago
  I'm so damn tired of the "host it locally" mentality. Not everyone has the resources to host all of that locally. For example, most open source projects. But even outside of that, we use github for issue tracking, the new project management kanban stuff, a CI server, reading documentation (which is offline, but the online versions are nicer on the eyes), and a ton more. Not to mention that StackOverflow and other discussion forums tend to be used by many. Yes you can host all of that locally, but we don't have a few hundred thousand a year to spend on some sysadmins to maintain all of that, and we don't have the time or money to run the machines, vet the software, and keep it up more reliably than github does for next to nothing.
  - 6d6b73 10y ago
    And I'm so damn tired of people complaining about cost to run stuff locally. The true cost of not having some basic stuff setup locally, even for backup purposes is when situation like this happens. It does not take long time or resources to download all of the libraries, with corresponding docs to a local server, or even your laptop. It is not complicated to have all of the new issues sent to an email to have a version of them available at all times. And you don't need a sysadmin to administer all of that.
    - Klathmon 10y ago
      >And you don't need a sysadmin to administer all of that. I disagree with that. If you have a server, you need a sysadmin. End of story. Who is going to secure the system and setup ssh keys? who is going to run updates? who is going to monitor for security issues? who is going to run backups? who is going to secure those backups? who is going to oversee the installation of the network, the battery backups, the racks, the server hardware, etc... Who will swap out bad disks? Who will recover the system when it goes down? Who is going to double the hardware and setup high availability (remember, you are competing with github for uptime here)? And god help you if you have one guy that does all of this. What happens if he gets hit by a bus? An on-prem server isn't a "backup", it's a liability. And without the resources to maintain it, it's going to become a nightmare. I've been there, and I won't ever do it again. I'm either going to pay to do it right, or give it to someone who will. And if that means a few hours of downtime every year or so, then that's a wonderful tradeoff for me. > It does not take long time or resources to download all of the libraries, with corresponding docs to a local server, or even your laptop. It is not complicated to have all of the new issues sent to an email to have a version of them available at all times. Luckily github (and alternatives) provide all of that. It sends us emails and slack messages on everything, so if it's down, we can still read, and we all have our local repos. But reading is different than working.
      - 6d6b73 10y ago
        If you have any substantial business, you already have a sysadmin on your team. He's not doing his job if he has no local versions of almost everything that is online. He should be staging everything locally, before deploying to the cloud. The currently very popular way of deploying everything live, without any testing, or staging is one of the reasons behind current crappy state of the internet.
        prefect42 10y ago
        I disagree, with very large companies, you have no "local" sysadmin, and no local versions of anything. Especially if your IT department is actually its own company.

forgottenpass 10y ago

Isn't it the whole idea of git to make user independent from place like github? Yup. But the whole point of GitHub is to make you dependent on GitHub. They've been slightly successful.