2 ms·
> All your code history is one git rebase away from being abolished forever unless you also GC right away, it's not gone.
by chii 3y ago
> All your code history is one git rebase away from being abolished forever
unless you also GC right away, it's not gone.
- Terr_ 3y agoYep, and also: 1. You shouldn't be allowing anybody to force-push rebased stuff onto major branches in your main repo (the one builds come from) anyway. This is especially important to support auditing and trace-ability. 2. Just because the folder is a git-repo isn't an excuse not to have it part of your regular offsite backup set.
- gorgoiler 3y agoThere are reasons to want branch protection but audit isn’t one of them. An auditable system would be keeping an immutable log of the git repo actions in a separate, append-only location. It wouldn’t rely on the thing being written to all the time, by users, to never get broken. In your model, your audit history only needs one bug in the branch-protection tool for it to be destroyed. Think of it like syslog. It’s good to keep a log of events but it’s bad to rely on the /var/log/syslog on your web server. You should be logging to a remote, append-only system. (However I would concede that if we are talking about lawyer-proof-audit — SOC2, ISO etc — rather than actual security auditing, then branch protection is probably just fine.)