The whole point of git is to be decentralized so there is no reason for you to not have your current version available even when a remote is offline.

▲

mr_mitm 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

How do people even on hacker news of all places conflate git with a code hosting platform all the time? Codeberg, GitHub or whatever are for tracking issues, running CI, hosting builds, and much more.

The idea that you shouldn't need a code hosting platform because git is decentralized is so out of place that it is genuinely puzzling how often it pops up.

▲

hombre_fatal 3 hours ago | parent [-]

OP didn't conflate them.

They said they want to be able to rely on their git remote.

The people responding are saying "nah, an unreliable remote is fine because you can use other remotes" which doesn't address their problem. If Codeberg is unreliable, then why use it at all? Especially for CI, issues, and collab?

	▲	keybored an hour ago \| parent [-]
		The person you’re replying to is saying that you can do everything outside of tracking issues, running CI, ... without a remote. Like all Git operations that are not about collaboration. (but there is always email) Maybe a hard blocker if you are pair programming or collaborating every minute. Not really if you just have one hour to program solo.

▲

dandellion 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

It's also trivial to have multiple remotes, I do in most of my repos. When one has issues I just push to the other instead of both.