Maybe I'm too old, but are there people that really didn't know that any ssh access is sufficient for using git?
most people think git = github
Yup. I’ve heard several people say that Git is a product from Microsoft…
You already have a Git server
21–30 of 454 posts
Re: You already have a Git server
#22Maybe I'm too old, but are there people that really didn't know that any ssh access is sufficient for using git?
Also relatively unknown: You can clone from a directory. It won't accomplish the backup feature but it's another option/feature.
Re: You already have a Git server
#23Earlier quoted context omitted.
most people think git = github
I always found these sort of categorical denigrations to be off base. If most people do think git = github then that's because they were taught it by somebody. A lot of somebodies for "most people". Likely by the same somebodies who also come to places like this. It has always taken a village to raise a child and that is just as true for an infant as a junior programmer. But instead we live in a sad world of "why did…
Despite your indignation, the observation that most people think GitHub is git is entirely true. Do you point it out when you spot someone having that mistaken belief? I do.
Re: You already have a Git server
#24Re: You already have a Git server
#25Re: You already have a Git server
#26Interesting. I am just trying to decide between self-hosting Forgejo and other options for hosting Git in own private network.
Could also consider running a Tangled knot (lightweight, headless git servers): https://tangled.org
Re: You already have a Git server
#27Maybe I'm too old, but are there people that really didn't know that any ssh access is sufficient for using git?
I didn’t know either - or rather, I had never stopped to consider what a server needs to do to expose a git repo.
But more importantly, I’m not sure why I would want to deploy something by pushing changes to the server. In my mental model the repo contains the SOT, and whatever’s running on the server is ephemeral, so I don’t want to mix those two things.
I guess it’s more comfortable than scp-ing individual files for a hotfix, but how does this beat pushing to the SOT, sshing into the server and pulling changes from there?
Re: You already have a Git server
#28Earlier quoted context omitted.
most people think git = github
Nonsense... Even someone who knows that git isn't GitHub might not be aware that ssh is enough to use git remotely. That's actually the case for me! I'm a HUGE fan of git, I mildly dislike GitHub, and I never knew that ssh was enough to push to a remote repo. Like, how does it even work, I don't need a server? I suspect this is due to my poor understanding of ssh, not my poor understand of git.
> I don't need a server?
You do, an SSH server needs to be running on the remote if you want to ssh into it, using your ssh client - the `ssh` command on your laptop. It's just not a http server is all.
You start that server using the `sshd` [systemd] service. On VPSs it's enabled by default.
Git supports both http and ssh as the "transport method". So, you can use either. Browsers OTOH only support http.
Re: You already have a Git server
#29I have been doing this for many years.
If you want a public facing "read only" ui to public repositories you can use cgit (https://git.zx2c4.com/cgit/about/) to expose them. That will enable others to git clone without using ssh.
I keep my private repositories private and expose a few public ones using cgit.
Re: You already have a Git server
#30Earlier quoted context omitted.
most people think git = github
Yup. I’ve heard several people say that Git is a product from Microsoft…
I wouldn't mind it if those people are from non-tech background.
Now, if it is a growing misconception among cs students or anyone doing software development or operations, that's a cause for concern.