I think I have this problem before. Instead of asking the boss to use GIT, I provoke my peer to see the capability of GIT. Not everyone would take my demonstration of GIT as advantage (or whether he just don't want to learn new thing), but now only one don't use GIT. And in the end it's company rules to use GIT and he had to use GIT anyway :)

This is a dangerous last resort suggestion as it may result in bad consequences.

Sometimes the boss isn't willing to listen to an underling but will listen to a peer or superior. If your boss isn't willing to use git, even after trying to persuade them with solid arguments, talk to someone else about it.

If you can't host it on your own server... then change to gitlab you can make private repositories as contrary to github without paying but you should pay for being able to make commits as a group or agency. The most important thing is that you will save a lot of time. Probably hours every day, whenever you're uploading your code (since the moment you stop coding and start looking for the HD) take times and don't stop till you merge every change with the code you receive and so, then do some maths to take account the co-workers time and then make more maths to calculate based on their salary how much money does it cost the company to make things the way they're doing it.... I can bet you that seeing the loss in money they will change immediately.

If all of that does not work you could make a localhost gitlab hosting, I think this should work in a way easier and cheaper sense, but you won't be able to pull anything if the computer isn't on and won't be able if you're not connected to same wifi or lan.

Hmm reading sth like this is a little funny at first but rather disappointing in the end. I am talking about your superiors decisions, of course.

I remember myself reading sth like that 4-5 years ago (how can I convince my boss to use git) and I am going to reproduce a smart answer I read in that thread. No worries just dump them!!! That's it.

I know you probably like them but the meaning of this answer is that since they miss sth obvious like this then they probably miss already many other things too. For sure you don't deserve to struggle that hard to persuade your boss for this. I have some personal experience with some managers who denied the use of some technologies like sass, coffeescript or tools like grunt, gulp, browserify etc because of some stupid reasons and in the end I went away because I want to deal with smart people and not stubborn ones.

Sorry if i have disappointed you, I felt the same back then but now i find this answer quite smart to be honest.

Apart from that you can have a self hosted environment using Gitlab so if you want to push things you have to find a way to implement that kind of solution and present it to them as a working one. Of course as I told you before you are struggling already quite hard.

I tried talking to them about GIT but they turned it down all in the name of wanting to secure their codes.

Override an entire codebase with some crap and tell them 'if we'd had git this wouldn't have happened in the first place but if it did, we could've easily rolled it back.

They're actually very contradictive because nothing secures your code better than git and its workflow, simply because it was built for it.

The large services like GitHub and Bitbucket probably have articles on this, regarding the security aspect. The easiest way to get them on board should probably be to list the top reasons how git could save both time and money. For example the possibility to back-track, the strong collaboration features and such. People are always a little bit hesitant to something new to them but you can always showcase some of all the companies who use it (both large and small ones).

If security really is that much of an issue you can host it on your own servers using something like GitLab, so that shouldn't be an issue.