On Thu, Jun 23, 2016 at 7:03 PM, @lbutlr <[email protected]> wrote: > > Oh, yes, that makes sense in the cases that I am using BBEdit to edit the > files, but it doesn’t account for the times I am sshed in to the machine. I > guess I was thinking of something a bit lower-level that would simply do the > versioning and such behind the scenes regardless of the tool used to edit the > files. >
Git is a source code revision control system. Just like CVS, Subversion, Mercurial, Perforce, and so on, it won't do things "automatically" behind the scenes. You most absolutely can use it to version /etc and other directories, but you're still going to have to stage your changes and make each commit. It would be editor-agnostic as you're desiring, but it won't be transparent/hands off. And it wouldn't be terribly valuable to version an area hands-off like that - you'd not have any metadata giving you context to your changes. The commit message you create for each commit give you context so you can understand why you made a particular change. If all you want is an automated backup, Timemachine, a cron-job'd rsync or other backup solution could be made to do that. And you could set them up to keep periodic snapshots (ie "versions"). Git is an excellent system for managing a directory of textual config files like /etc. But you need to understand what the tool does and how it works before embarking on such a use. - Steve -- This is the BBEdit Talk public discussion group. If you have a feature request or would like to report a problem, please email "[email protected]" rather than posting to the group. Follow @bbedit on Twitter: <http://www.twitter.com/bbedit> --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "BBEdit Talk" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
