[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Old Index]
Re: git copies of cvs modules available
Thus wrote Curt Sampson (cjs%NetBSD.org@localhost):
> On 2010-01-11 08:37 +0100 (Mon), S.P.Zeidler wrote:
> > The git repo has been broken after a system panic such that the obvious
> > way forward was to restore a backup
> > git fsck will tell you there is a problem, but not fix it
> Right; this sort of thing can happen to any VCS.
If it hasn't happened to one repo in over 4 years and to another twice in
3 months, that does constitute a -slight- difference in stability.
> > If we should be using something as brittle as git, backups should be
> > run at least daily...
> I'm not clear; are you saying that Git is more brittle than anything
> else in this situation?
I have not tested much of 'anything else', but more brittle than CVS,
certainly. You don't have an index without which your entire repo becomes
unreadable in cvs, f.e.
> In fact, if you're quite paranoid, just have a post-receive-hook that
> pushes the master repo to the backup repo on a remote machine, and the
Thanks for describing the cvs-anoncvs relationship to me.
Main Index |
Thread Index |