4 ms·

I have absolutely no desire to send all of my companies intellectual property to a mail server. It could be the best workflow in the world, but if one email add

I have absolutely no desire to send all of my companies intellectual property to a mail server. It could be the best workflow in the world, but if one email address gets breached, you're leaking everything and that's really unacceptable.

delusional 3y ago
Isn't this also the case for centralized git servers? Even moreover if you run a monorepo.
- bastardoperator 3y ago
  No clue, I prefer to use a monster that actually has security mechanisms, and protocols in place designed by professionals.
  - yjftsjthsd-h 3y ago
    > I prefer to use a monster that actually has security mechanisms, and protocols in place designed by professionals. Like a mail server?
    - bastardoperator 3y ago
      I don't know, sending sensitive information over plain text doesn't scream security to me. So no, unlike a mail server.
      - yjftsjthsd-h 3y ago
        It's 2023; mail servers have been using TLS for a very long time.
        bastardoperator 3y ago
        Yes, you can transmit messages via SMTP using TLS, but you don't need any special tools to read the email once it's reached its destination which is the point you seem to be missing. And before you scream PGP, almost nobody uses it.
        yjftsjthsd-h 3y ago
        But that's exactly the same as anything else; you move git commits that you store locally (either encrypted or not) over an connection that's encrypted in transit (whether SMTP/TLS, HTTP/TLS, or git/SSH) to a remote server that stores the repo/commits (either encrypted or not). None of this is different depending on whether the remote is a mail server or github (or whatever).
        pietro72ohboy 3y ago
        TLS secures your message till the endpoint which is a (plaintext) code repo. Why would you want a special tool to read plaintext code? Your argument makes no sense whatsoever. I’m not sure what you’re getting at here but it sounds more like an irrational hatred of email than something genuinely technical to me.
        rakoo 3y ago
        So, like a centralized git server ?

delusional 3y ago

Isn't this also the case for centralized git servers? Even moreover if you run a monorepo.

bastardoperator 3y ago
No clue, I prefer to use a monster that actually has security mechanisms, and protocols in place designed by professionals.
- yjftsjthsd-h 3y ago
  > I prefer to use a monster that actually has security mechanisms, and protocols in place designed by professionals. Like a mail server?
  - bastardoperator 3y ago
    I don't know, sending sensitive information over plain text doesn't scream security to me. So no, unlike a mail server.
    - yjftsjthsd-h 3y ago
      It's 2023; mail servers have been using TLS for a very long time.
      - bastardoperator 3y ago
        Yes, you can transmit messages via SMTP using TLS, but you don't need any special tools to read the email once it's reached its destination which is the point you seem to be missing. And before you scream PGP, almost nobody uses it.
        yjftsjthsd-h 3y ago
        But that's exactly the same as anything else; you move git commits that you store locally (either encrypted or not) over an connection that's encrypted in transit (whether SMTP/TLS, HTTP/TLS, or git/SSH) to a remote server that stores the repo/commits (either encrypted or not). None of this is different depending on whether the remote is a mail server or github (or whatever).
        pietro72ohboy 3y ago
        TLS secures your message till the endpoint which is a (plaintext) code repo. Why would you want a special tool to read plaintext code? Your argument makes no sense whatsoever. I’m not sure what you’re getting at here but it sounds more like an irrational hatred of email than something genuinely technical to me.
        rakoo 3y ago
        So, like a centralized git server ?