logoalt Hacker News

charcircuityesterday at 10:16 AM3 repliesview on HN

>I definitely reject the "git compatible" approach

If your version control system is not compatible with GitHub it will be dead on arrival. The value of allowing people to gradually adopt a new solution can not be understated. There is also value in being compatible with existing git integrations or scripts in projects build systems.


Replies

wavemodeyesterday at 9:20 PM

I don't think Git/GitHub is really all that big of a lock-in in practice for most projects.

IMO Git is not an unassailable juggernaut - I think if a new SCM came along and it had a frontend like GitHub and a VSCode plugin, that alone would be enough for a many users to adopt it (barring users who are heavy customers of GitHub Actions). It's just that nobody has decided to do this, since there's no money in it and most people are fine with Git.

show 1 reply
quadrifoliateyesterday at 10:27 AM

Based on reading this, I don't see anything that would prevent keeping track of a repo tracked by this database with Git (and therefore GitHub) in addition to the database. I think the "compatible" bit means more that you have to think in terms of Git concepts everywhere.

Curious what the author thinks though, looks like it's posted by them.

show 1 reply
conartist6yesterday at 10:27 AM

A system as described could be forwards compatible with git without being backwards compatible with git. In other words let people migrate easily, but don't force the new system to have all the same flaws of the old

show 1 reply