Can’t help the OP on their original question, but I am a fool who feels they need to say something on the snapshot/backup debate.
Snapshots alone are not a backup. If your snapshots rely on the original underlying filesystem/medium/pool/storage/whatever-word-you-want-to-use, it is distinctly not a backup, because it is inclusive of the original system.
A git repo alone is not a backup, it is version control. You must make an entirely separate and distinct copy of the git repo on another machine before you can in any way approach calling that repo “backed up”.
I think you could ask 10 IT professionals “What is a backup” and get 20 distinct answers. There’s so many attributes to consider - is the “backup” portable? Is the “backup” OS independent? Is the “backup” on two or more separate data storage mediums/systems? Is the “backup” able to be taken offline? Does the “backup” have the ability to form chains of fulls and incrementals/differentials? Is the “backup” encrypted with separate keys than the original system? Can the “backup” be restored reliably to a foreign system? Can the “backup” be tested independent of the original system? Can administration of the “backup” be done without administrative rights to the original system?
Snapshots can be used as part of a backup process, but snapshots alone are not backups.