News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:A better pull request by jackweirdy on Thursday January 22, 2015 @12:39PM (#8930450)
If it’s personal stuff, why do you need an upstream?

Assuming it’s for redundancy, why not just copy the folders as part of a normal backup?

Re:A better pull request by wickchuck on Thursday January 22, 2015 @12:51PM (#8930513)
Having an upstream can be useful for CI testing and for deployments with tools like Capistrano. Plus it allows you to pull down your code from other environments if needed and acts as a additional backup, so there are potentially lots of reasons to have one.
Re:A better pull request by arnarbi on Thursday January 22, 2015 @01:25PM (#8930723)
Because even though it's personal stuff, it's shared between many computers. For people that live in VCSs all day, it's just more convenient (history, branches, etc.) than e.g. storing it on Dropbox or similar.
Re:A better pull request by AceJohnny2 on Thursday January 22, 2015 @12:46PM (#8930477)
Cloud access? I have a similar problem where my various machines are behind NATs/firewall (personal computer, workstation...). It could just be more convenient to put it in the cloud rather than have to poke port forwarding or VPN rules between the machines.
Re:A better pull request by Kimitri on Thursday January 22, 2015 @12:47PM (#8930487)
Well, there's the obvious benefit of tracking changes and it also provides a nice way to sync files selectively between computers.
Re:A better pull request by z-e-r-o on Thursday January 22, 2015 @01:33PM (#8930778)
In my case, OS X has the latest git, while Windows is stuck on 1.9, and my git folders get corrupted if I do a push on OS X and simply do a status on Windows. I guess something has changed between 1.x and 2.x but this corruption is really not something which should ever happen in a VCS. My solution is to use Gitlab instead of Dropbox only local repos.
Re:A better pull request by Alupis on Thursday January 22, 2015 @03:16PM (#8931465)
I'm not aware of any changes between 1.x and 2.x that would corrupt a repo... I use a mix on various systems, some even still have git 1.7.x on them. The only problem I run into is when you have some script that depends on a newer git feature added in a newer version...

My money would be on Dropbox busting your repo somehow. I don't think Dropbox is an ideal solution for pushing/pulling git repos from.

Re:A better pull request by sytse on Thursday January 22, 2015 @11:26PM (#8933396)
GitLab B.V. CEO here, thanks for using us!
Re:A better pull request by wzsddtc on Thursday January 22, 2015 @12:47PM (#8930489)
The benefit that you don't need a git server and can have the code running on different machines! :)
Re:A better pull request by tracker1 on Thursday January 22, 2015 @01:18PM (#8930683)
FYI, you really don't need a git server, just an SSH host you have filesystem access to.
Re:A better pull request by saraid216 on Thursday January 22, 2015 @12:52PM (#8930526)
Wait, wait, wait.

You mean the version control system would be... distributed!?