4 ms·

If you've used Git for only a year, and you've got a mere "hundreds of commits" under your belt with distributed version control systems, then the pain you're

If you've used Git for only a year, and you've got a mere "hundreds of commits" under your belt with distributed version control systems, then the pain you're feeling may not necessarily be coming from the tool. Many of your unmet needs basically boil down to a desire for automatic replication of the state of a codebase to a remote endpoint. Right now, it's an explicit choice made by the developer. There are a lot of good reasons for this. If you don't feel like any of them apply to you, it should take you maybe half a day to write a script that creates a throwaway commit and is pushed to an arbitrary remote. Or you can just put your project in Dropbox and call it a day. Also, if you're looking to work on a Git project using a Chromebook, maybe just use the inline edit mode in GitHub. In all, I don't think the features you're looking for necessarily belong in a distributed version control system or its related protocols. As I've outlined above, you can get what you want by extending such a system, or using existing extensions on top of those systems.

DesiLurker 9y ago
ya many of those things are quite simple & can be easily achieved by having multiple remotes with one sitting in a common NFS mounted drive (I've even done sshfs & it all works fine). far as backup is concerned it just a tarball to nfs. alternatively one might look at something like gitfs. My problem with such 'overly integrated solutions' is that they work until they dont. if git were to do it the okay but what if you are dealing with multiple git repos? what if some of them are gitfusion repos from perforce backend? IMHO simple & deterministic (as in deterministic to human mind) is better.
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
kartickv 9y ago
Author here. You're right that I'm a Git beginner. I don't want to hack up my own distributed version control system that fails in interesting ways :) And yes, I do put my Git workspaces in Google Drive, but that doesn't address many of the limitations in the post. Github's inline edit mode is exactly the kind of affordances we need. When I needed to make a simple change to my open-source project (adding comments to document assumptions), I didn't want to mess with downloading, resolving conflicts, merging and pushing. Regarding your point that this doesn't belong in a version control system (a point that other people made on this HN post) but in extensions, I want an integrated environment. I don't want to investigate extensions and hooks and scripts to make things work together. I want it to be seamless. Just like IDEs are different from text editors (and upset some old-school programmers that "XYZ shouldn't be in a text editor"), I'm advocating a new style of version control system that does more.
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]

DesiLurker 9y ago

ya many of those things are quite simple & can be easily achieved by having multiple remotes with one sitting in a common NFS mounted drive (I've even done sshfs & it all works fine). far as backup is concerned it just a tarball to nfs. alternatively one might look at something like gitfs. My problem with such 'overly integrated solutions' is that they work until they dont. if git were to do it the okay but what if you are dealing with multiple git repos? what if some of them are gitfusion repos from perforce backend? IMHO simple & deterministic (as in deterministic to human mind) is better.

deleted 9y ago
[deleted]

kartickv 9y ago

Author here. You're right that I'm a Git beginner. I don't want to hack up my own distributed version control system that fails in interesting ways :) And yes, I do put my Git workspaces in Google Drive, but that doesn't address many of the limitations in the post. Github's inline edit mode is exactly the kind of affordances we need. When I needed to make a simple change to my open-source project (adding comments to document assumptions), I didn't want to mess with downloading, resolving conflicts, merging and pushing. Regarding your point that this doesn't belong in a version control system (a point that other people made on this HN post) but in extensions, I want an integrated environment. I don't want to investigate extensions and hooks and scripts to make things work together. I want it to be seamless. Just like IDEs are different from text editors (and upset some old-school programmers that "XYZ shouldn't be in a text editor"), I'm advocating a new style of version control system that does more.

deleted 9y ago
[deleted]

deleted 9y ago

[deleted]