3 ms·

Sure, networks drop packets and sometimes break down. But the number of issues with a solid office network is fairly low. Glass fiber, gigbit to the server. Fol

Sure, networks drop packets and sometimes break down. But the number of issues with a solid office network is fairly low. Glass fiber, gigbit to the server. Folks don't work via VPN. I'm not pretending that the "road warrior" and remote worker use case isn't well served by git - but the "office worker tied to a desk" use case still exists. And from what I see is that it's more dominant than we'd expect.

wtetzner 12y ago
> Folks don't work via VPN. Plenty of people work via VPN. Not just people that have remote jobs, but people that just work from home one or two days per week.
- TeMPOraL 12y ago
  VPNs are sort of primarily used to work via them.
- kedean 12y ago
  Don't forget everyone working for a consulting company.
acdha 12y ago
> But the number of issues with a solid office network is fairly low The point was simply that “low” is not the same as “does not apply” and that matters when it's something which prevents someone from doing their job. Even when I worked at 100% on-site projects, I used git-svn so I could make local commits and ignore locking mishaps. Don't get me wrong, however, I'm totally in agreement for having better tools for supporting the local, centralized workflow. The other reason I used git-svn was because merging was much more reliable and I could rebase changes to squash commits before sharing them with others. All three of those features should work well in any serious version control system regardless of whether it's centralized.
- sgift 12y ago
  Your machine will stop working sometimes, far more often than your office network stops working(1) and then all your nice little, local commits which haven't been pushed so far are down the gutter. There's always a trade-off, you just have to know it and work accordingly. (1) If this doesn't apply to your office network get a better network. Now.
  - acdha 12y ago
    This statement reflects a misunderstanding of the problem: In either case, you will lose unpublished work in the event of a catastrophic local drive failure. Only in the case of a centralized system, you will also be unable to work unless the entire network path and remote server is available. This will almost never be a question of data loss but it means that you will be unable to perform version control operations until it's resolved.
  - lmm 12y ago
    > Your machine will stop working sometimes, far more often than your office network stops working(1) Bollocks. I've had two machine failures in eight years, versus at least 20 network failures. Sure, maybe the network admins at five different companies I've worked for all just happen to be a bunch of muppets, but I highly doubt it.
    - sgift 12y ago
      > Sure, maybe the network admins at five different companies I've worked for all just happen to be a bunch of muppets, but I highly doubt it. That's your privilege. I don't. The only time I remember the network going down was after a complete air conditioning failure in the server room (a highly unlikely event in itself, but not IMPOSSIBLE) which forced a complete shutdown of IT services. And even then people could still work. Sure, not as well as usual but working was possible. The last time a machine failed was .. oh right. Yesterday.
      - lmm 12y ago
        Your machine, or anyone's machine? Remember to multiply a network failure by the number of people if you're doing that kind of comparison. Also, get better machines. The last time a machine failed at this all-macbook shop was several months ago.
mahyarm 12y ago
Entire remote offices work exclusively through VPNs to the main office. It's definitely a major usecase.

wtetzner 12y ago

> Folks don't work via VPN. Plenty of people work via VPN. Not just people that have remote jobs, but people that just work from home one or two days per week.

TeMPOraL 12y ago
VPNs are sort of primarily used to work via them.
kedean 12y ago
Don't forget everyone working for a consulting company.

acdha 12y ago

> But the number of issues with a solid office network is fairly low The point was simply that “low” is not the same as “does not apply” and that matters when it's something which prevents someone from doing their job. Even when I worked at 100% on-site projects, I used git-svn so I could make local commits and ignore locking mishaps. Don't get me wrong, however, I'm totally in agreement for having better tools for supporting the local, centralized workflow. The other reason I used git-svn was because merging was much more reliable and I could rebase changes to squash commits before sharing them with others. All three of those features should work well in any serious version control system regardless of whether it's centralized.

sgift 12y ago
Your machine will stop working sometimes, far more often than your office network stops working(1) and then all your nice little, local commits which haven't been pushed so far are down the gutter. There's always a trade-off, you just have to know it and work accordingly. (1) If this doesn't apply to your office network get a better network. Now.
- acdha 12y ago
  This statement reflects a misunderstanding of the problem: In either case, you will lose unpublished work in the event of a catastrophic local drive failure. Only in the case of a centralized system, you will also be unable to work unless the entire network path and remote server is available. This will almost never be a question of data loss but it means that you will be unable to perform version control operations until it's resolved.
- lmm 12y ago
  > Your machine will stop working sometimes, far more often than your office network stops working(1) Bollocks. I've had two machine failures in eight years, versus at least 20 network failures. Sure, maybe the network admins at five different companies I've worked for all just happen to be a bunch of muppets, but I highly doubt it.
  - sgift 12y ago
    > Sure, maybe the network admins at five different companies I've worked for all just happen to be a bunch of muppets, but I highly doubt it. That's your privilege. I don't. The only time I remember the network going down was after a complete air conditioning failure in the server room (a highly unlikely event in itself, but not IMPOSSIBLE) which forced a complete shutdown of IT services. And even then people could still work. Sure, not as well as usual but working was possible. The last time a machine failed was .. oh right. Yesterday.
    - lmm 12y ago
      Your machine, or anyone's machine? Remember to multiply a network failure by the number of people if you're doing that kind of comparison. Also, get better machines. The last time a machine failed at this all-macbook shop was several months ago.

mahyarm 12y ago

Entire remote offices work exclusively through VPNs to the main office. It's definitely a major usecase.