| ▲ | AlexandrB 2 hours ago | |||||||||||||
> Luckily we already have a distributed version control system that can take over github Surprised that this wasn't just a link to Git. The biggest benefit of Git over predecessors was that it enabled decentralization. Github re-centralized the common case for the sake of convenience. | ||||||||||||||
| ▲ | jeremyjh 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] | |||||||||||||
Yes but on Earth every project needs a canonical main branch. Most also need a way to manage and review changes to that branch that all project members have direct access to. | ||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||
| ▲ | Xirdus an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-] | |||||||||||||
The biggest benefits of Git over predecessors were branching, 3-way merge, and history rewrites (in particular, rebase and squash). As much as Git fans wanted decentralization to be a major selling point, decentralization has never been a major selling point. | ||||||||||||||
| ▲ | poisonborz 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | |||||||||||||
Github and other providers before proved that git itself is just a small part of managing code, there's a lot more needed for a full workflow, and it's meaningful for it all to be tightly coupled. | ||||||||||||||
| ▲ | Arubis 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | |||||||||||||
> "Crypto had attracted grifters from the beginning, even though its most respected figures were more interested in changing the world. As Silicon Valley investors piled in after them, they wanted to fund companies that would become essential to the crypto economy, allowing them to make vast amounts of money. Entrepreneur after entrepreneur discovered that the best way to turn a profit in a decentralized economy was to figure out ways to centralize parts of it again." (Henry Farrell, Underground Empire) | ||||||||||||||