git still works pretty well, I just wouldn't try to use it as a bank account.

Well, Git's also not a blockchain at least in the way commonly meant by the term. But yeah, it'd be a pretty bad bank account (and an even worse way of doing money transfers.)

Seems a bit of a stretch. Git is not linear, and there’s no consensus mechanisms

git is linear, if multiple users have a different main branch history you have a problem.

Pull requests in github is actually very similar conceptually to a consensus mechanism used in crypto currencies. Everyone has an identical copy of the main branch with an identical history of every commit in order, a PR is saying "I think this commit goes next" and, if you use code reviews, the PR approval is consensus.

This is the most unhinged thing I have ever read about git ever. Please share whatever you are hitting.

Have you ever seen a git graph? Does this look linear? https://tortoisegit.org/docs/tortoisegit/images/RevisionGrap...

Have you considered that the single source of truth, the chain that has consensus in the blockchain terminology, is the main/primary branch?

All secondary branches are works in progress that may be proposed as new commits to main.

Sticking with the blockchain comparison, every side branch in got is akin to potential blocks that miners are working on.

Well, that’s it. I am done with this site.

Hah, sounds good. I still don't get your argument here, I would be curious to hear more.

My point is that git is a data store involving a genesis block (initial commit), blocks of changes/diff's, tracked in sequential order, and with a form of consensus (code reviews and merges to primary).

What is missing that makes it not a blockchain?

And my caveat here, I can't stand arguments for cryptocurrencies and have never purchased any. Blockchain as a concept is fine, and git is a blockchain as best I can tell.

Let it go

No idea why this got down voted.

git is very much a blockchain

- sequential list of changes to a data source (commits)

- single, shared history of changes (main branch)

- users creating potential next change(s) to be added to the history (side branches and forks)

- consensus mechanism for new change blocks (merge requests and code reviews or approvals)

What's missing?

Receiving a coin / token everytime someone gets their branch merged? This is a joke btw, please don't make a gitcoin YC....

git blockchains are famous for being easy to fork (-;

You can fork a blockchain by building a ecosystem with a different consensus.

Any blockchain is easy to fork, just have a fully copy of the chain and make a new block.