4 ms·

You can do all of this because Git repos are self-contained complete historical records. You could do this with a traditional VCS as long as you took frequent

You can do all of this because Git repos are self-contained complete historical records. You could do this with a traditional VCS as long as you took frequent backups. Git is an improvement in this regard, but not a revolution. Furthermore, you are describing a workflow that is inconsistent from many "industry best practice" recommendations. If GitHub went down, a very large number of Git users would not be able to run tests or deploy their code to production - their CI/CD pipelines don't work without GitHub. Their historical record of issues goes away when GitHub goes down, etc.

anticodon 7y ago
With traditional VCS, I would lose all the history and ability to work (to commit my changes, for example) if server goes down. And I understand that issues and CI/CD will also stop working, but neither of that is part of the VCS itself. I'm not aware of distributed issues (maybe FOSSIL) and CI/CD. Still it doesn't mean that GitHub makes Git centralized.