I have a dumb git question and I can never seem to formulate a google search that will help me.
I use a Mac and for some reason I am able to use `head` (lowercase) instead of `HEAD` (uppercase) in every command and its trained in my muscle memory.
So when I go to another computer, this shortcut isn't there, so when I type `git reset --hard head^` I get an error, and I have to go back and change it to `git reset --hard HEAD^`.
Anyone know of a configuration option or something somewhere that I can enable this?
> Anyone know of a configuration option or something somewhere that I can enable this?
I'd suggest that you retrain yourself instead. "HEAD" and "head" are not the same thing, and any fakeout configuration to change that will also be nonstandard and not available everywhere.
The underlying issue is that HEAD is the label Git uses for the reference to the top of the repo. It's saved in the filesystem as .git/HEAD.
MacOS filesystems are case-preserving by default. Linux/POSIX filesystems are case-sensitive by default. I consider this a bad default setting in macOS. Try "cp FILENAME filename" sometime. :(
Anyway, consequently, on default macOS, "head" will be remapped to "HEAD", if "head" does not exist. Watch out for "Head" and "hEaD" though. Of course those won't happen in normal Git usage (though they could be valid, and different, tag names!).
My suggestion is to not let bad macOS defaults creep into your habits. And to not make things even more weird by trying to reproduce their bad behaviour in non-macOS environments.
MacOS defaults to a case insensitive filesystem. Branches are just a commit tag which is just a git object which is a file??? I think? Everything is a file?
> Logs Insights is limited to the last 3 hours of logs
You may want to check again, there is a date selector in the upper right of the page that allows you to choose between 5m, 30m, 1h, 3h, and 12h. There is also a Custom option which allows up to 4 weeks, or a calendar widget where you can choose any start and end date.
Correction: the Daily Mail and Daily Express newspapers' editorial directors would prefer ten innocents suffer than one bogneyman[1] enjoy free roam of the nation.
[1] Substitute "paedophile", "Islamic terrorist", "asylum seeker" as per this weeks' dim-right-wing national outrage.
I am not in a regulated industry, but we have recently gone through the process of getting SOC2/ISO27001 certified.
This is what was cited for us.
ISO27001:2013 A.6.1.2: Segregation of Duties. Conflicting duties and areas of responsibility must be segregated in order to reduce the opportunities for unauthorized or unintentional modification or misuse of any of the organization's assets.
Surely that means that no one individual can push a change they created without involving someone else, but that it is still fine as long as any two people (even if they're on the same team) are involved? You could solve this by e.g. forcing GitHub to require a review.
Not impossible. even in a prescriptive framework like ISO 27001, adequate SOD is a judgement call between you and the auditor. Generally speaking, if a single dev can push a code change to prod, in a way that would escape audit or not require a second pair of eyes, that would not be compliant. So if a dev writing code, also manages the deploy environment, that may not pass muster.
But it's not that cut and dried. There are degrees of rigor.
No. Assuming a well configured continuous deployment type environment; you just need to have peer review on code before it can hit production, and you need to have controls in place over the who, what and when of elevated access to production being granted
This all breaks down as soon as audit realise the Devops team is also admin of the ci/cd stack and therefore all controls put in place to make it harder for a single actor to do bad stuff can be bypassed via this all powerful system.
