3 ms·
heh, this was my argument back in like 2009 when everyone was all, "DECENTRALIZED!! We have to take months to migrate from SVN to git cause DECENTRALIZED!! You
by Domenic_S 3y ago
heh, this was my argument back in like 2009 when everyone was all, "DECENTRALIZED!! We have to take months to migrate from SVN to git cause DECENTRALIZED!! You don't one a single point of failure do you?!"
all I could say was, uhhhh github is a single point of failure. Unless you're mailing diffs around like Linus (which nobody I knew did), it's 6 of one, half-dozen of the other.
there are lots of great things about git and especially git over e.g. svn (especially merges) but I never bought the decentralization argument the way it was spearheading the conversation back then.
- diroussel 3y agoWith git I can create, edit and merge branches locally. If GitHub is down I can push to another remote I can send diffs. I can calmly carry on working until GitHub is back. If GitHub is down too much I can migrate to gitlab or gitea. I would say the decentralised features of git work for me. And they are no overblown.
- capableweb 3y agoSadly, people seem to push their entire development flows into GitHub Actions, so things like deployments happens on GitHub's servers, and then their servers go down and you suddenly can't deploy anymore... Or writing their documentation via GitHub issues/PR descriptions/comments and now you cannot access that either...
- zdragnar 3y agoIf your SVN server went down, you couldn't even commit. At least with got, you can do everything as normal except push and pull, and that's only if you don't have multiple remotes (which, admittedly, very few GitHub users do).