To cut a long story short, we are now using git and deploying through beanstalk on a site. Some of the many advantages are code in sync and all changes tracked and a good backup procedure. The downside is that there’s a learning curve.

However one party seems adamant of reverting to live editing on the site? Mainly being that they don’t have git experience. We naturally are a little concerned. It is just us or does live editing seem a little dangerous when a few parties are involved?

All thoughts welcome.

How many people are involved. I know we do live editing, but our our team is small. We’ve been looking at Git and BeanStalk, but admittedly kind of like Mountee and a development/staging area. Git can be a lot to get use to, which is why we haven’t moved forward. That and we prefer Mountee over saving templates as files, which needs to happen for Git to work properly.

There would be 3 teams working on this site and live editing would just be a nightmare.

Git may be hard to learn but version control on a site like this is a must. Unfortunately for the other party but these things happen.

The basic components of Git aren’t that hard, it’s the more full featured stuff. Maybe they just need a good GUI tool. What about Tower? http://www.git-tower.com/  Three teams is a lot to manage, definitely a job for Git with Beanstalk. May a good GUI interface will make transition easier.

You can still use mountee with version control. Use navicats data synchronization feature to update the dbs.

Why live editing? That should always be prohibited even for one man team. You lose all benefit of version control by doing that.

You can setup a staging sever and use .htaccess to limit to team view only, with a team password.