5 ms·
> They take backups, name each folder based on the date, and what feature that was just completed (or just about to be started) that prompted the backup. I bet
by chimeracoder 8y ago
> They take backups, name each folder based on the date, and what feature that was just completed (or just about to be started) that prompted the backup. I bet you a pound.
All they need to do is to compress those folders with zlib, and then they've reinvented git.
- peheje 8y agodiff, branch, merge, blame, stash
- a1369209993 8y agoThat's what I do (for personal projects where I don't care about complex commit-graphs) and I do call it version control.
- chucksmash 8y agoJustifications like "where I don't care about complex commit-graphs," of which there are a few in this thread, always sound like they're trying to hide confusion about the tool by making it sound overly complex. Nobody cares about complex commit-graphs! If you're just one person, you can work directly on master and just commit everything every time: git commit -am "I did some work" Don't try to follow gitflow or githubflow or whatever it is that's made you bail on real version control. But why play the copying folders monty game in 2019?
- a1369209993 8y agoYou don't seem to understand my previous comment. Tarballs are better. Complex commit-graphs are not a reason to avoid git for small projects, they are a reason why I can't avoid git for large projects. The revision history is complex or not regardless of what software I'm using to slog through it.
- Moru 8y agoNonono, that method existed long before Git. Git reinvented the wheel, if they did a better job about it is not for me to judge :-)