Copying vs of cloning?

[Dan North]

I would think the safest way to keep a remote backup would be to have a cron
job on the remote machine that does a regular hg pull from your central
repository.

Cheers,
Dan

On 10/3/07, Jens Alfke <jens at mooseyard.com> wrote:
>
>
> On 3 Oct '07, at 9:59 AM, Matthieu Moy wrote:
>
> > push, probably not. Local clone, yes it would (it just hardlinks by
> > default).
>
> True, but hard-linking isn't a backup :) and cloning isn't
> incremental. If using Hg for backups, you should use 'hg push' to a
> repository in a secure location. In that case, if your source repo
> gets corrupted that badly, the push will fail so the damage won't
> propagate to the backup, which is a definite benefit over a regular
> backup system!
>
> --Jens
> _______________________________________________
> Mercurial mailing list
> Mercurial at selenic.com
> http://selenic.com/mailman/listinfo/mercurial
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://selenic.com/pipermail/mercurial/attachments/20071005/feee6156/attachment.htm