How would you use version control for personal data, like a personal website?

Create a repository on your local system to contain the master copy of your files. Work on the site in your local repository and deploy the Web site to the live server directory whenever. You could use an existing tool for this, or write a small script with a build or export routine and file copying.

Create a repository on your local system to contain the master copy of your files. Work on the site in your local repository and deploy the Web site to the live server directory whenever. You could use an existing tool for this, or write a small script with a build or export routine and file copying.

The last bit is good practice, but not everybody does it. Some people make the working copy of a repository clone Web-accessible instead. I don't recommend this - Git doesn't track file permissions, you shouldn't be doing VCS operations directly on the live copy of your Web site, and there is no reason to potentially expose a complete copy of your repository on the Web.

I use the Webby utility to build my site, and this includes a deployment function. Capistrano and Fabric are specialized deployment tools. I know that Capistrano works with your VCS to enable you to easily deploy and rollback your live sites.

I also have a clone of my repository on another system, which I push changes to - purely as a backup.

Stuart, I think your response addresses my question best. Would you or anyone be willing to elaborate on what you mean by writing a small script as a build or export routine. Would this just be something like a stage.Sh that pushes all repository files related to my website to a directory?

I think I understand having not used GIT what you mean by permissions though. So working copy on the live webserver is bad idea. Got it.

But should the aforementioned script then take this into account and also specify the permissions when copied? Thanks for your insight. – snap Mar 12 '10 at 19:50 Yes, your deployment tool could just be a shell script that runs rsync or something to copy from a directory in your working copy to the Web site root directory on the server.

The purpose of it is really to ensure that you have a consistent process that only publishes exactly the files that you want to appear on your public site. – Stuart Ellis Mar 13 '10 at 11:23 The permissions issue is that Git deliberately does not store full permissions of files or directories, so that if you use it as a synchronization tool between the development and live copies of your site you may have a nasty surprise. Rsync and other mirroring and deployment tools do handle permissions, so you just need to configure things correctly.

Forcing a permissions reset probably won't be necessary unless you have an unusual situation. – Stuart Ellis Mar 13 '10 at 11:27.

I version all of my data. I commit each time I change it. Versionning my code allow a backup too.

Use git. Git gives you the convenience of offline commits plus the ability to push changes to other machines. I keep my configuration files (screen, shell, emacs,...) in git to have them synchronized between my machines.

Also makes it dead-easy to get your custom setup on a machine you're only temporarily using. Split up projects into separate repositories (don't commit your home folder) as you can only pull whole repositories with git.

For projects (even non-collaborative) I use trunk/tags/branches folders (I didn't when I started but learnt the hard way) but for personal file they really aren't necessary, especially as binary files can't be merged. A commit after every set of changes I'm comfortable with is good enough for me.

1 git is not svn – hasen j Mar 12 '10 at 21:03.

I cant really gove you an answer,but what I can give you is a way to a solution, that is you have to find the anglde that you relate to or peaks your interest. A good paper is one that people get drawn into because it reaches them ln some way.As for me WW11 to me, I think of the holocaust and the effect it had on the survivors, their families and those who stood by and did nothing until it was too late.