5 ms·
Unfortunately this occurred at the exact moment I was deploying some changes. Makes me think that being so dependent on GitHub for a production code repo is a l
by not_chriscohoat 13y ago
Unfortunately this occurred at the exact moment I was deploying some changes. Makes me think that being so dependent on GitHub for a production code repo is a little big dangerous.
Redundancy would certainly solve this issue, though.
- deleted 13y ago[deleted]
- apendleton 13y agoThere's already built-in redundancy. Wherever you pushed to Github from has a complete copy of the current state of your repository. Github is effectively just a publicly accessible mirror, but you can always push to a different remote elsewhere, push directly to your production instance, or even host your repo in an s3 bucket, all while Github is down.
- joeblau 13y agoI've been in some development environments where the GitHub master branch is what the build system pulls from in order to deploy to dev, staging and production. With that setup, it's more challenging since the build process probably involves more steps and potentially ssh keys that are only allow the build server to deploy. Depending on how many repos you need, I would say set up an alternative remote on bitbucket.org.
- not_chriscohoat 13y agoRight, I get that...I meant a separate remote when I said redundancy. GitHub has just been so reliable I haven't even needed other remotes for the past 8 or so months we've been using it like joeblau mentioned.