Re:Using Git with Dropbox
by iveqy on Sunday June 30, 2013 @05:46AM
(#5965249)
#git on freenode has some interesting thought about this:
11:44 -gitinfo([email protected])- Storing git repositories on DropBox is a Very Bad Idea™. Use a free hosting service (such as Bitbucket or GitHub), or read !dropbox_why if you insist upon having your repo corrupted.
11:44 <iveqy> !dropbox_why
11:44 -gitinfo([email protected])- git uses a lot of frequently-changed small files, which dropbox's synchronization algorithms barf on. Use of multiple dropbox clients compounds this, with hilarious results
Re:Using Git with Dropbox
by bradleyland on Monday July 01, 2013 @09:44AM
(#5970530)
If you're playing by the rules, it includes any scenario where a Git repo is stored within Dropbox.
Git expects to have full control over the files in the git repo. Git does not expect any changes to the files that it does not perform itself. Any scenario where an outside process performs regular changes to the Git repo is an opportunity to corrupt the repo.
Re:Using Git with Dropbox
by isxek on Sunday June 30, 2013 @06:51AM
(#5965342)
Something faster, something that didn't require connection to central server, yet still allowed me to access my work on both my home and work computers. Git alone met majority of these requirements, I just needed a remote repository to share and sync my work between computers.
Other DVCS's (Hg, Fossil, Bazaar, Monotone, etc.) did not?
11:44 -gitinfo([email protected])- Storing git repositories on DropBox is a Very Bad Idea™. Use a free hosting service (such as Bitbucket or GitHub), or read !dropbox_why if you insist upon having your repo corrupted.
11:44 <iveqy> !dropbox_why
11:44 -gitinfo([email protected])- git uses a lot of frequently-changed small files, which dropbox's synchronization algorithms barf on. Use of multiple dropbox clients compounds this, with hilarious results
Git expects to have full control over the files in the git repo. Git does not expect any changes to the files that it does not perform itself. Any scenario where an outside process performs regular changes to the Git repo is an opportunity to corrupt the repo.
Other DVCS's (Hg, Fossil, Bazaar, Monotone, etc.) did not?