4 ms·

If it’s personal stuff, why do you need an upstream? Assuming it’s for redundancy, why not just copy the folders as part of a normal backup?

AceJohnny2 12y ago
Cloud access? I have a similar problem where my various machines are behind NATs/firewall (personal computer, workstation...). It could just be more convenient to put it in the cloud rather than have to poke port forwarding or VPN rules between the machines.
Kimitri 12y ago
Well, there's the obvious benefit of tracking changes and it also provides a nice way to sync files selectively between computers.
wzsddtc 12y ago
The benefit that you don't need a git server and can have the code running on different machines! :)
- tracker1 12y ago
  FYI, you really don't need a git server, just an SSH host you have filesystem access to.
- saraid216 12y ago
  Wait, wait, wait. You mean the version control system would be... distributed!?
wickchuck 12y ago
Having an upstream can be useful for CI testing and for deployments with tools like Capistrano. Plus it allows you to pull down your code from other environments if needed and acts as a additional backup, so there are potentially lots of reasons to have one.
arnarbi 12y ago
Because even though it's personal stuff, it's shared between many computers. For people that live in VCSs all day, it's just more convenient (history, branches, etc.) than e.g. storing it on Dropbox or similar.
z-e-r-o 12y ago
In my case, OS X has the latest git, while Windows is stuck on 1.9, and my git folders get corrupted if I do a push on OS X and simply do a status on Windows. I guess something has changed between 1.x and 2.x but this corruption is really not something which should ever happen in a VCS. My solution is to use Gitlab instead of Dropbox only local repos.
- Alupis 12y ago
  I'm not aware of any changes between 1.x and 2.x that would corrupt a repo... I use a mix on various systems, some even still have git 1.7.x on them. The only problem I run into is when you have some script that depends on a newer git feature added in a newer version... My money would be on Dropbox busting your repo somehow. I don't think Dropbox is an ideal solution for pushing/pulling git repos from.
- sytse 12y ago
  GitLab B.V. CEO here, thanks for using us!
  - deleted 12y ago
    [deleted]

AceJohnny2 12y ago

Cloud access? I have a similar problem where my various machines are behind NATs/firewall (personal computer, workstation...). It could just be more convenient to put it in the cloud rather than have to poke port forwarding or VPN rules between the machines.

Kimitri 12y ago

Well, there's the obvious benefit of tracking changes and it also provides a nice way to sync files selectively between computers.

wzsddtc 12y ago

The benefit that you don't need a git server and can have the code running on different machines! :)

tracker1 12y ago
FYI, you really don't need a git server, just an SSH host you have filesystem access to.
saraid216 12y ago
Wait, wait, wait. You mean the version control system would be... distributed!?

wickchuck 12y ago

Having an upstream can be useful for CI testing and for deployments with tools like Capistrano. Plus it allows you to pull down your code from other environments if needed and acts as a additional backup, so there are potentially lots of reasons to have one.

arnarbi 12y ago

Because even though it's personal stuff, it's shared between many computers. For people that live in VCSs all day, it's just more convenient (history, branches, etc.) than e.g. storing it on Dropbox or similar.

z-e-r-o 12y ago

In my case, OS X has the latest git, while Windows is stuck on 1.9, and my git folders get corrupted if I do a push on OS X and simply do a status on Windows. I guess something has changed between 1.x and 2.x but this corruption is really not something which should ever happen in a VCS. My solution is to use Gitlab instead of Dropbox only local repos.

Alupis 12y ago
I'm not aware of any changes between 1.x and 2.x that would corrupt a repo... I use a mix on various systems, some even still have git 1.7.x on them. The only problem I run into is when you have some script that depends on a newer git feature added in a newer version... My money would be on Dropbox busting your repo somehow. I don't think Dropbox is an ideal solution for pushing/pulling git repos from.
sytse 12y ago
GitLab B.V. CEO here, thanks for using us!
- deleted 12y ago
  [deleted]