We have shared git repositories [LWN.net]

We have shared git repositories

Posted Jan 15, 2009 15:41 UTC (Thu) by emk (guest, #1128)
In reply to: It's not dead yet by niner
Parent article: GNOME considers DVCS choices

At work, we use shared git repositories on a central server. Everybody working on a given project has "push privileges", and they're strongly encouraged to push to master at least once per day.

This has a number of advantages:

1) Git is much easier to back up than Subversion. Correctly backing up Subversion requires an expensive hotcopy step (at least for our ~30GB repository). Git repositories can be backed up either by mirroring, or by straightforward disk backups, thanks to the reflog. (There's a way to recover a Subversion repository backed up in the middle of an operation, but it's messy.)

2) Git+SSH places a lower load on the server than SVN+SSH. At least for big repositories, Git's data structures take far less disk IO to initialize on first launch than Subversion's. This matters to people logging in via SSH.

From a sysadmin's perspective, git is well-behaved. And it supports a very wide variety of workflows, so not every project needs to work like the Linux kernel.

(Log in to post comments)

We have shared git repositories

Posted Jan 15, 2009 18:47 UTC (Thu) by drag (subscriber, #31333) [Link]

Ya.. Were I work we have a central Git server that is 'official' then each user hacks on their own little world.

Then when you want to submit your work you clean it up, make sure all the important revisions you've worked on are represented and push it back up to the central git server. That way you get the benefits of showing all the major stages you've gone through, and get it represented in the history on the main git server, in your own work while avoiding forcing users through the dozens of commits a hour you do while hacking away.

It's very nice to do a commit every time you close out a file or make a risky edit to something. The more you use it the more useful it gets.