4 ms·
Not really, since everybody who cloned a repo has a full copy of everything. Reminds me of the saying that writing git was just a backup strategy for Linus Tor
by cel1ne 6y ago
Not really, since everybody who cloned a repo has a full copy of everything.
Reminds me of the saying that writing git was just a backup strategy for Linus Torvalds: FTP-mirrors were the first step to ensure that the kernel was never lost, git was needed to mirror the source-history as well.
- zdw 6y agoExcept all the proprietary lock-in tools they add to Git like the issue tracker, PR's, discussion, wiki, released binaries, container registry, access control settings, etc.
- pb82 6y agoI think you mean Github, those features are not part of git.
- chrisseaton 6y agoThat's what they said - 'add to Git'. > proprietary lock-in tools they add to Git Git + their other stuff = GitHub.
- alessivs 6y agoOf course the immediate parent meant GitHub. It is the grand-parent comment that conflated the two: > one central point of failure on github? >> Not really, since everybody who cloned a repo has a full copy of everything. (everything != Git repo)