281–290 of 454 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They don't have a reason. There's no policy that keeps them from doing this. Sure, the whole point is to ultimately have the code in a common place where backups and code review can happen, but if it's a matter of starting something sooner because it takes a few days for the request to flow through to get things set up, they are not constrained by that AT ALL. They can create a git repo with git init immediately, sta…
What are you using for the centralized repos? Why does it take multiple days in the first place?
It's not about how long the action takes, it's about how much the team responsible for that is loaded and can prioritize things. Every team needs more round tuits. Anyone who works in an IT support role knows this. The point is that they can self-service immediately and there is no actual dependency to start writing code and using revision control, but people will trot out any excuse.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You are missing the whole point. The OP is mentioning how people are so used to using github, that they are so oblivion on using git offline
It just doesn't make sense to me unless it's a company policy type of thing.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
When this kind of “sliding” happens it’s usually because the base implementation was missing functionality. Turns out CLI interfaces by themselves are (from a usability perspective) incomplete for the kind of collaboration git was designed to facilitate.
> Turns out CLI interfaces by themselves are (from a usability perspective) incomplete for the kind of collaboration git was designed to facilitate. git was designed to facilitate the collaboration scheme of the Linux Kernel Mailing List, which is, as you might guess... a mailing list. Rather than a pull-request (which tries to repurpose git's branching infrastructure to support collaboration), the intended unit of i…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What are you using for the centralized repos? Why does it take multiple days in the first place?
It doesn't matter. They are centralized on servers that are ssh accessible, creating it is effectively mkdir and git init. It's not about how long the action takes, it's about how much the team responsible for that is loaded and can prioritize things. Every team needs more round tuits. Anyone who works in an IT support role knows this. The point is that they can self-service immediately and there is no actual depende…
Cannot emphasize this whole notion enough; Very roughly, Github is to git what gmail is to email. It's mostly probably fine if that's the thing most of everybody wants to use and it works well; but also it's very unwise to forget that the point was NEVER to have a deeply centralized thing -- and that idea is BUILT into the very structure of all of it.
Idk if git was designed to not be used in a centralized way. Like all other common CLIs, it was simply designed to work on your PC or server without caring who you are, and nothing stopped a corp from turning it into a product. Torvalds made git and Linux, then he put Linux on Github.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Having a web interface was really appreciated by users, it would seem.
It is also other features such as GitHub workflow, releases, integration with other tools, webhooks etc. that makes it useful.
Maybe I'm too old, but are there people that really didn't know that any ssh access is sufficient for using git?