On the Relative Merits of using Git Projects in an Actuarial Team

Are Git and R Projects still optimal for the 2026 Actuarial Team?

In modern actuarial teams, collaboration is increasingly digital, automated and governed by version control systems. As such, the natural question arises: Should actuaries adopt Git based project or even R project structures for shared work?

Proponents argue that Git projects streamline collaboration, improve reproducibility, and reduce the existential dread associated with file names like Model_vFinal_FINAL2_UseThisOne_TrustMe.xlsx. But do these alleged advantages truly outweigh the burdens introduced by Git? 

In the spirit of scientific inquiry, this article explores the case in depth.

Alleged Benefits of Git Projects

Version Control

Git allegedly prevents the proliferation of conflicting file versions. Instead of five analysts overwriting each other’s models, they can each commit changes independently.

In practice, however, actuaries may still experience existential crises trying to resolve merge conflicts in a .xlsx file, possibly leading to philosophical reflections on the fragility of human collaboration.

Collaboration Across Teams

Git and shared projects are said to facilitate seamless teamwork by providing a central repository, enabling multiple contributors to work simultaneously.

Of course, this assumes everyone remembers to pull before pushing — a bold assumption in any actuarial team facing quarter end reporting.

Reproducibility and Audit Trails

Actuarial work demands transparency, and Git provides a perfect audit trail. Every line of code, every fix and every accidental deletion is immortalised.

The downside? So is that one experimental commit message reading: 
“Trying something dodge… hope this works lol”

Challenges of Using Git in Actuarial Contexts

The Learning Curve

Actuaries are brilliant individuals capable of solving stochastic differential equations before breakfast. Unfortunately, Git commands like rebase, stash, or checkout --orphan seem to operate under different laws of the universe.

One accidental git reset --hard can undo both progress and morale.

Excel Is Not Exactly Git-Friendly and What Even is an Excel Project

Many actuarial processes still rely heavily on Excel files, Access databases, or lovingly curated VBA macros. Git, meanwhile, is fundamentally built for text-based workflows.

The result? GitHub becomes a very expensive Dropbox.

Many actuaries ask, Why should we use an R project – Excel does not have projects? Despite advances in R workflows, actuarial processes remain closely integrated with Excel.

Input files, validation tools, and reporting templates frequently exist outside the project directory, often stored in shared drives with names reflecting their evolutionary history.

Examples include:

  • Input_FINAL_v8.xlsx 

  • Input_FINAL_v8_REVISED.xlsx 

  • Input_FINAL_v8_REVISED_USE_THIS.xlsx 


While RStudio Projects accommodate such dependencies, the surrounding file ecosystem often extends beyond project boundaries, requiring continued navigation of shared directories.

The Implications of Tidyverse Decommissioning

Recent communications regarding the planned decommissioning of the tidyverse ecosystem introduce additional uncertainty into structured R workflows.

Many RStudio Projects rely heavily on tidyverse tools for data transformation and workflow consistency. Should these tools be retired, teams may increasingly rely on base R scripts, legacy functions and historically preserved code fragments. It must be asked if projects are still based.

Yes, there are rumours of the metaverse being a replacement for tidyverse – which could mitigate the impacts, but experts caution against taking this at face value, insisting there is much uncertainty.  

In such an environment, flexibility may prove as valuable as structure.

Teams accustomed to navigating shared directories may adapt more readily to ecosystem transitions than those heavily dependent on tightly structured project workflows.

Cultural Fit Within Actuarial Teams

Actuarial culture values precision, documentation, and clear auditability. Git, on the other hand, values minimalism and cryptic comments like:

  • “fix”
  • temp changes”
  • changed some stuff”
  • what is happening help"

Asking an actuary to push to main without a four-page validation memo is, frankly, barbaric.

A recent interview with an actuarial associate who prefers to remain anonymous revealed a growing concern among younger actuarial professionals regarding constraints on creativity imposed by projects, and their perceived links to outdated societal structures.

The Conclusion

After careful consideration of both the theoretical benefits and the overwhelming existential terror associated with merge conflicts, the conclusion is clear:

Working in Git and R projects is definitely not better for actuarial teams. 

Sure, Git may offer structure, version control, transparency, collaboration tools, and modern workflows, but actuarial science has thrived for decades on communal spreadsheets, mysterious macros and the unshakeable belief that the most recent file is the right one.

Git and R projects simply can’t compete with that level of tradition.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Posit Product Lifecycle Announcement