Copying vs of cloning?

[Matthieu Moy]

Jens Alfke <jens at mooseyard.com> writes:

> However, there is one reason why a normal file-copy-based backup would  
> be a good idea: in case some terrible bug turns up in Hg that destroys  
> repositories (or appends corrupt revisions to them). Hg seems quite  
> stable, but it's certainly less stable than the filesystem itself :)

Hg is not the only one in a position to destroy your repository. The
user can do a very good job at it too (try 
perl -pi -e 's/short-regexp-likely-to-be-matched-by-binary/anything/g'
recursively in a repository for example ...).

Revision control is an excellent complement for backups, but not a
good _replacement_!

-- 
Matthieu