Richard Bucker

not; git vs fossil

Posted at — Oct 4, 2019

I do not imagine that google will know what to do with my title but it’s not about git or fossil. I’ve referenced this article a couple of times already. The point being that fossil is robust enough and complete enough for normal projects where git is meant for large projects with large teams. Let’s be clear fossil is a complete version control system. It contains a wiki and ticket system; neither of which are going to win any UX awards but there is some real crap out there. You might also say it’s weak in support for golang but even that has a workaround or two.So why on earth would I want to use VSCode when I can use Atom; why would I want to use Android Studio, XCode, Visual Studio when I can code in Turbo Pascal(Pascal not withstanding).So as I struggle with the likes of kubernetes(k8s), k3s, k3os, microk8s;¬†why would I use anything other than Swarm.The nice thing about swarm is that I can network my swarm devices anywhere I can reach out…. Who needs istio or that other complicated crap! I can put leaders and nodes anywhere. They can take on any kind of workload. The orchestration can be as simple or as complicated as you want. And it just works. The best part is that if and when the cluster crashes it can be restored. It’s tedious but can be done.I’m looking at the projects I’m working on and I’m tempted by the shiny bits in kubernetes but it’s clearly a waste of resources.The funny thing is that most people don’t need the complexity either. They just do not have the willpower to move past it.