Eric Sunshine <sunshine@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > Taking into consideration that people who are experiencing such > corruption will likely include the name of the syncing service in > their search query, would it make sense to mention some well-known > services here in order to make it more likely that people will > actually find this entry? Something like this, perhaps: > > It is important not to use a cloud syncing service (such as DropBox, > FooBar, CowMoo, BuzzingBee, etc.) to sync any portion of a Git > repository... I do agree that in a repository being actively modified, any backup/sync solution that works per-file fashion would not work well. But is "cloud" a good word to characterise and group these per-file backup/sync solution? Doesn't rsync work the same per-file fashion, and the only reason why it is a better fit is because it is not continuous, not attempting to "sync" while the repository is in use, until the user explicitly says "OK, I am ready to go home, so let's stop working here and send everything over to home with rsync"? >> +* There are no additional worktrees enabled for your repository. > > I don't fully understand this restriction. Can you explain it (at > least here in the email discussion)? > >> +* You are not using a separate Git directory outside of your repository root. > > Same question about this restriction. As long as you know what you are doing and catch everything in quiescent state, you should be fine, I would think.
