At the price and size of Linode instances, it's cheaper and I feel better knowing I'm in control when I run Redmine+Gitosis. When I had my github account and something went wrong, I couldn't just ssh in and fix it. All I could do is wait. Now, for some people, I can see how waiting is an easier solution. I personally just don't like it. (of course, this is reffering to private repos. public repos are still king on gi…
It's amazing to me that you feel more confident in your own abilities to keep a server running than GitHub... you must be a really great sysadmin! The GitHub folks are pretty hardcore! I, for one, am a positively mediocre sysadmin. And the amount of time I have to spend waiting for GitHub to fix bugs is almost certainly far, far, FAR less than the amount of time I'd spend scrambling (but not waiting!) to fix my own.…
It's not that hard to install a source control server, whether it's git, svn or mercurial.
Well luckily you have the entire repository where ever it exists on your dev machines. So I don't expect there would be any data loss. In addition all the commits, tags, trees and files are hashed. The content is hashed, if there is a problem you'd know about it.
At the price and size of Linode instances, it's cheaper and I feel better knowing I'm in control when I run Redmine+Gitosis. When I had my github account and something went wrong, I couldn't just ssh in and fix it. All I could do is wait. Now, for some people, I can see how waiting is an easier solution. I personally just don't like it. (of course, this is reffering to private repos. public repos are still king on gi…
It's amazing to me that you feel more confident in your own abilities to keep a server running than GitHub... you must be a really great sysadmin! The GitHub folks are pretty hardcore! I, for one, am a positively mediocre sysadmin. And the amount of time I have to spend waiting for GitHub to fix bugs is almost certainly far, far, FAR less than the amount of time I'd spend scrambling (but not waiting!) to fix my own.…
The beauty os a dvcs is that I have a full copy on my machine as well.
But seriously, if you use git over ssh there is no sys admin work other than running apt-get upgrade
Well, here's the beauty of Github--if they lose all my repos I just don't care. Since I've got a copy of my repos locally, there's absolutely nothing they can lose... Worse case if they go completely down for a couple days I can still collaborate using ssh or "git send-email". This is the only reason I decided to use Github after avoiding Sourceforge and their ilk for the past decade and a half.
"This is the only reason I decided to use Github after avoiding Sourceforge and their ilk for the past decade and a half." But why github? Why not gitorious.org? If github goes away, I still have my code, but I lose any issues people have filed on the site, and I lose being able to easily check on forks of my projects where people might be doing interesting stuff. I had been using gitorius.org, but moved to github fo…
There is the Github API, so you could backup the non-repository data as well by writing a couple of scripts, if you were so inclined.
I have two repos living in "Repository temporarily unavailable" status for several days now. I understand that shit happens, but what's really frustration is inquiry about what can or will be done about it and getting no response. Do I wait? Do I just move stuff to my own server? Go back to Gitorious? It's not that I can't keep working, but the main reason I use Github is to make my OSS projects available. For other…
Two questions: 1) did you file a support ticket? that seems like the sort of thing they'd be serious about fixing, and 2) do you have a paid account? In some sense, it doesn't matter, OSS developers are important to their mission too, but... well, I'm curious because I have a paid account and if you do too then that makes me more afraid for myself.
Yes and yes ($7/mo). I just now got some mail from github, and need to take a look at some stuff to sort things out. So it's being looked into.
This is an interesting theory, but it isn't how git's client actually works. If the repository exported a list of "mirrors" to the client that it then stored and was willing to use, that would be awesome, but otherwise you have a million people out there who are now just getting error messages when they do "git pull" and the only fix is for them to go back to your web page and try to get information on what is happen…
But git-over-http is just a normal http client, and http supports redirects. So while nobody does this , it's possible to load-balance http clients to "valid" servers just like you would with any other http-based app. ssh:// and git:// are more difficult, but project contributers with commit access can just ping you on irc to see what's up with the repo and where to push to today.
That's great, but still requires doing your own setup on your own hostname: conceptually that is a single repository with one URL.
This is an interesting theory, but it isn't how git's client actually works. If the repository exported a list of "mirrors" to the client that it then stored and was willing to use, that would be awesome, but otherwise you have a million people out there who are now just getting error messages when they do "git pull" and the only fix is for them to go back to your web page and try to get information on what is happen…
This is a straw man argument. The question isn't whether Git could be more intuitive/user-friendly (Hint: It should be, in fact I bet my company on it [see my profile]), or whether it is more secure/cheap to host your own repo. If you have a million people `pull`ing from your repo, of course you should have be hosting your own public access point. But, in 80% of cases, people can't be bothered to figure out how to se…
This comment is totally unrelated and is itself a strawman. Yes, it is easier to use GitHub: I will not argue that fact. However, using GitHub will cause people to be pulling from GitHub, and GitHub may go down. This is a tradeoff, and is one people use a lot: you use a shared platform and give up control of the URL to get easier outsourced hosting. But to argue that git's decentralization solves that problem is disingenuous: it means that people could theoretically still pull your repository, but only after finding out what that fallback URL is and manually resetting their origin, which 90% of git users don't even know how to do. Meanwhile, many people are willing to spend the five minutes it takes to learn how to run their own server and want to avoid this tradeoff by hosting their own stuff on their own hostnames so they can publish stable URLs, but /can't/, because they like GitHub's social features, none of which (due to the aforementioned distributed features, humorously) actually require GitHub to be the canonical repository URL: if you want to use GitHub, you are going to have people cloning and pulling your GitHub mirror (or even worse: adding your GitHub mirror as a submodule) and when it goes down they are going to get errors, and you will have no control over it. That sucks.
I'm still on the fence about that whole cloud thing, personally.
Well, here's the beauty of Github--if they lose all my repos I just don't care. Since I've got a copy of my repos locally, there's absolutely nothing they can lose... Worse case if they go completely down for a couple days I can still collaborate using ssh or "git send-email". This is the only reason I decided to use Github after avoiding Sourceforge and their ilk for the past decade and a half.
That's the beauty of a DVCS (Git in this case) _not_ Github.
I hope this has nothing to do with the people who hacked sourceforge..
Git has full cryptographic history (and data) authentication, so any changes to the history would be easily detectable. And you can sign known-good commits, so that even if you've never pulled before, you can still verify the part of the history that's been signed. SVN and CVS are missing this key feature, which is why the sf.net hacking is scary.
I'm a Git n00b, so thanks for pointing that out! No wonder git has killed off SVN
At the price and size of Linode instances, it's cheaper and I feel better knowing I'm in control when I run Redmine+Gitosis. When I had my github account and something went wrong, I couldn't just ssh in and fix it. All I could do is wait. Now, for some people, I can see how waiting is an easier solution. I personally just don't like it. (of course, this is reffering to private repos. public repos are still king on gi…
It's amazing to me that you feel more confident in your own abilities to keep a server running than GitHub... you must be a really great sysadmin! The GitHub folks are pretty hardcore! I, for one, am a positively mediocre sysadmin. And the amount of time I have to spend waiting for GitHub to fix bugs is almost certainly far, far, FAR less than the amount of time I'd spend scrambling (but not waiting!) to fix my own.…
> The GitHub folks are pretty hardcore!
What gives you that idea? I run several cronjobs that deal with their service, and it's down a lot compared to other similar services. My jobs deal with that gracefully, but if I wanted to I could easily set up a more reliable service than GitHub if my only goal was to host *.git repositories, not have any of the other nice things they provide.