No dual-remote backup. GitHub IS the backup.

Never add second remote to forks. chirag127 fork on GitHub = backup. Stop re-asking

No dual-remote backup

Rule

Forks have ONE remote: origin -> chirag127/<repo> + upstream -> <author>/<repo> (for upstream syncing only).

NEVER propose:

• Adding chirag127 as a second origin
• Adding a backup remote pointing at a mirror
• git remote set-url --add --push origin <second-url> dual-push setups
• A mirror repo under any account

Why this rule exists

User explicitly rejected dual-remote backup on 2026-06-27 after I asked about it twice in the same session. Decision logic: GitHub itself is the backup. Two copies on the same provider survive together or die together (provider outage, account ban). Real backup = different provider (restic to Backblaze B2 — already locked in decisions/ops/backup-restic-b2-plus-windows-builtin).

Anti-patterns

• multi-choice question prompt option that says “add chirag127 as second remote”
• multi-choice question prompt option that says “dual-push”
• Any “do you want to add a backup remote” question
• Any rationale about “two copies of the same data on GitHub for resilience”

When this rule does NOT apply

• The user explicitly asks for a dual remote — then ask once with a “your previous decision was no, are you reversing it?” confirmation MCQ
• A different provider (GitLab, Codeberg, B2) — that’s not GitHub-dual, that’s cross-provider backup, which IS valid and IS covered by the restic rule

Cross-refs

• dont-create-bak-folders — same principle, different surface
• backup-restic-b2-plus-windows-builtin — what real backup looks like

Edit on GitHub · Back to index