Let me introduce you to my friend, GeoCities.
Funny thing about free hosting.
> no matter how much armchair quarterbacking.
Transactions aren't armchair quarterbacking. Binary backups aren't armchair quarterbacking. Separating development from production isn't armchair quarterbacking. Kindly, you have no idea what you're talking about.
You can't give them credit for the repositories being mostly intact, when the ONLY parts that broke were the parts they mucked with to tie them into their database.
> but the reality of startups is that it very much is a race and features, for availability or recovery
And those are exactly the places where they screwed up.
Anyway, it's a great discussion so we can learn from other peoples mistakes. I will be triple checking my restores later today, and likely halt the project I'm working on to get cold standbys shored up asap. (but it's hard to prioritize house keeping over customer centric features in the race I'm running along side the Github crew)
Ironically the most fitting application would be to say that they're armchair quarterbacking their own database administering.
These are categorical mistakes.
"If you don't thing Github cuts the mustard, svn on
Google Code probably won't have problems like this..."
Neither will Mercurial on Google Code ;-)Disclaimer: I work for google on the Project Hosting product.
The code repos were never in danger, and they've been killing it in the market because they are racing to add awesome extra features, not racin to the bottom.
I don't disagree that they can do more in their db operations, and that it's fine for us paying customers to demand more, but the reality of startups is that it very much is a race and features, for availability or recovery or other, are viciously prioritized and many things don't happen until something breaks.
If you don't thing Github cuts the mustard, svn on Google Code probably won't have problems like this...
Disclaimer: I'm personal friends with much of the Github crew.