SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Submitted via IRC for SoyCow1984
If you’re a GitHub user, but you don’t pay, this is a good week. Historically, GitHub always offered free accounts but the caveat was that your code had to be public. To get private repositories, you had to pay. Starting tomorrow, that limitation is gone. Free GitHub users now get unlimited private projects with up to three collaborators.
The amount of collaborators is really the only limitation here and there’s no change to how the service handles public repositories, which can still have unlimited collaborators.
This feels like a sign of goodwill on behalf of Microsoft, which closed its acquisition of GitHub last October, with former Xamarin CEO Nat Friedman taking over as GitHub’s CEO. Some developers were rather nervous about the acquisition (though it feels like most have come to terms with it). It’s also a fair guess to assume that GitHub’s model for monetizing the service is a bit different from Microsoft’s. Microsoft doesn’t need to try to get money from small teams — that’s not where the bulk of its revenue comes from. Instead, the company is mostly interested in getting large enterprises to use the service.
Source: https://techcrunch.com/2019/01/07/github-free-users-now-get-unlimited-private-repositories/
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Wednesday January 09 2019, @01:44PM (1 child)
Is there a good encryption wrapper solution for git yet?
Would seem to be fairly easy to keep the local repo "in the clear" for all your tools to work with, while cloud hosted copy is obfuscated with cryptographic key.
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 2) by lentilla on Thursday January 10 2019, @12:32AM
I do not believe that would be possible - at least for your stated use-case.
Git (and similar) work by keeping a collection of differences between versions. For instance: if version one is "the cat sat on the mat" and version two is "the dog sat on the mat", your repository really only has to remember the original version and "replace with 'dog', at character 5".
Whilst git happily allows storage of binary data (it might even be an encrypted representation of something else), there is no advantage conferred by using a source control system other than as a pure repository for a chunk of binary data. The "diffs" would be meaningless.
(Remember that the encrypted version of "the cat sat on the mat" and "the dog sat on the mat" likely differ at each bit position, so there is no space saving either.)
If one wanted to keep the advantages of git (above and beyond a pure repository of BLOBs [binary large objects]) the THE SERVER NEEDS TO HOLD THE ENCRYPTION KEYS, which kind of defeats the whole purpose. Let me just restate that for clarity: unless the server can decrypt the data (for which it needs the keys), it can not do any of that "source control magic".
So: 1) git already allows encrypted transport; 2) if you want to store a project - encrypted - on the cloud - you'd be better off using a versioning filesystem rather than something designed for working with source code.
You are already on track with your original idea: keep your repository local and regularly run "git bundle", encrypt the resulting file using PGP, and upload the result.