3 ms·
Fully solo: no. Mostly solo: if that means you're in small teams, yes, since you don't need to follow the rigid workflows that prevent large companies from run
by pmeunier 5y ago
Fully solo: no.
Mostly solo: if that means you're in small teams, yes, since you don't need to follow the rigid workflows that prevent large companies from running into Git's problems.
- josefrichter 5y agointeresting. do big companies have some strict rulebooks for git? I thought everybody just follows "gitflow" model and that's enough.
- pmeunier 5y agoWell, even Gitflow, while not being unreasonable, wastes engineering time. Most devs know it, so at least they don't have to relearn when onboarding, but then their VCS shapes the way they organise their work, when it should be the opposite.
- AnthonBerg 5y agoI've been trying pijul fully solo. In my opinion, yes!, there are benefits. I'll try to give an example. It's been a while so I'm not 100% clear on how exactly I did it, but I had a central nix configuration Pijul repo, and the "personalized" config files for a particular machine under pijul as well – in another repo iirc? I cloned the nixos configuration files from the main repo into /etc/nixos. Then I added "personal" things like MAC addresses and an SSH key to the config file. Personal to that machine. Things that shouldn't go into the main repo. Recorded those changes into the "live machine" repo. What I ended up with was a very nice mechanism that knew about the customization entries and didn't get confused about them. I could write general changes to the machine-specific repo and easily pull them into the main repo without the version control system always getting confused about them. And vice versa. This might be possible with git. Personally I wouldn't bother and I will claim that it's not due to inexperience with git; Quite the opposite. I can certainly attest that it was very very easy and nice to do this with pijul.