I 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 sa

I 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.