4 ms·
> I've always felt that git is poorly designed for that reason. At the very least, there should be an "identity block" that commits etc point into, rather than
by jimktrains2 9y ago
> I've always felt that git is poorly designed for that reason. At the very least, there should be an "identity block" that commits etc point into, rather than embedding names, emails, and other identity information into immutable commits.
Misuse of git isn't a problem inherent to git.
- vertex-four 9y agoPutting your name and email into commits is the default behaviour of git, and git will not work until you do so. This is design, not misuse.
- jimktrains2 9y agoNo, putting the name and email you give it, if you give it one, is by design.
- vertex-four 9y agoSo the GDPR is entirely irrelevant because we could just give fake details to companies? And giving correct details to anyone, ever, is in fact “misuse”? That’s not how the law works, nor is it how it should work.
- jimktrains2 9y agoThis was specifically about git. However, it does appear that you need to at least provide a user identifier for git. I can understand why that would be useful in a distributed system. It could be opaque identifier, but you're points taken in this case.
- vertex-four 9y agoThis was about git in the context of the GDPR, so a company (say, a git hosting provider) is by definition involved. If you're sending commits to other private developers in some way that doesn't involve a company storing the data, the right to be forgotten/right for records to be corrected/etc in the GDPR is irrelevant in the first place.