From 1f74ec4f93f80a6b67780b2b7a9cbb81689d3c54 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Joey Hess Date: Tue, 13 Dec 2016 12:48:11 -0400 Subject: response --- ...nt_15_a4a0491a7dcee2e7b7786127518866af._comment | 22 ++++++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 22 insertions(+) create mode 100644 doc/special_remotes/rsync/comment_15_a4a0491a7dcee2e7b7786127518866af._comment (limited to 'doc/special_remotes') diff --git a/doc/special_remotes/rsync/comment_15_a4a0491a7dcee2e7b7786127518866af._comment b/doc/special_remotes/rsync/comment_15_a4a0491a7dcee2e7b7786127518866af._comment new file mode 100644 index 000000000..2f68c3f57 --- /dev/null +++ b/doc/special_remotes/rsync/comment_15_a4a0491a7dcee2e7b7786127518866af._comment @@ -0,0 +1,22 @@ +[[!comment format=mdwn + username="joey" + subject="""comment 15""" + date="2016-12-13T16:43:42Z" + content=""" +@davidriod you can do things like this with special remotes, as long +as the special remotes are not encrypted. + +I don't really recommend it. With such a shared special remote R and two +disconnected git repos -- call them A and B, some confusing situations can +occur. For example, the only copies of some files may be +on special remote R and git repo B. A knows about the copy in R, so +git-annex is satisfied there is one copy of the file. But now, B can drop +the content from R, which is allowed as the content is in B. A is then left +unable to recover the content of the files at all, since they have been +removed from R. + +Better to connect the two repositories A and B, even if you do work in +two separate branches. Then if a file ends up located only on B, A will be +able to say where it is, and could even get it from B (if B was set up as a +remote). +"""]] -- cgit v1.2.3