4 ms·
> Other than that, keeping copies on another computer is the only way to reliably protect against data loss in any VCS system. That’s not the point of GP post.
by bch 9y ago
> Other than that, keeping copies on another computer is the only way to reliably protect against data loss in any VCS system.
That’s not the point of GP post. In fossil for example, one can have multiple checkouts of a single repository (on a single computer by the same person) without fear this will lead to data loss. I don’t think this was suggested as a backup strategy, just a workflow feature.
- bfredl 9y agoI most certainly didn't claim it was the point of GGP either. The point was that no evidence at all have been put forward that git-new-worktree is less "data safe" than the corresponding fossil solution, on the contrary on the design level it seems designed to be safe to use. So it seems GGP didn't mention it because it didn't fit their narrative that git lacks features. At the same time I can't claim it is guaranteed to be "no data loss" because I didn't review all the code. If you are strongly concerned about data loss you would probably use backups, _regardless_ if you use git, fossil etc.
- bch 9y ago> If you are strongly concerned about data loss you would probably use backups, _regardless_ if you use git, fossil etc. Agree strongly.