On Fri, 8 Jul 2011 05:50:41 -0700 (PDT)
Craig <shadycr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> There's no accounting for users! (Not that I qualify yet...)
> The problem with using a VCS to do backup is that you have to rely on
> the users to do it, backups should run independently of the user.
> It's guaranteed given time that some project or code will end up bring
> useful but not committed and subsequently lost.
> Really only units of work or discreet changes should be committed,
> rather than the end of the last bug fix and the start of the next.
> Without getting too sidetracked can anyone answer my original
While you're correct about me sidetracking the discussion, I feel
oblidged to point out that liberating the developer from using one
central repo (like in Subversion) exactly provides the possibility to
play with different wild ideas, write crazy code and so on without
"spoiling" the main repository. This has been touted numerous times
as one of the upsides of DVCSes. Hence if you have a place to push
your work without the fear of disturbing other people the problem
becomes purely social. So I think what's needed is providing the devs
with their backup repos and explaining them that backing up their work
is just a matter of personal hygiene. After all I can barely beleive
that people who managed to master Git are so stupid not to understand
these matters provided you provided them with the necessary
Returning to the technical side, I'd be afraid about stuff like .
Of course, YMMV depending on precise systems setup but still I doubt
convoluted setups such as the one you're proposing receive much testing.
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Git
for human beings" group.
To post to this group, send email to firstname.lastname@example.org.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
For more options, visit this group at