[vlovich123]

I don’t understand this critique. You can copy a .git folder around just fine. You can expose a “server” by giving friends ssh keys that can only access the git stuff. In fact for a long time that’s how git “was done” at various corps.

[steveklabnik]

> You can copy a .git folder around just fine.

You can do this, but due to file locking, you can corrupt the state if it's shared. jj is specifically designed so that it won't corrupt the repo in this way: https://jj-vcs.github.io/jj/latest/technical/concurrency/

[1718627440]

Create a bare repo on the USB stick(/dropbox/Google Drive/random folder) and just push to the USB stick.

[steveklabnik]

Historically speaking, this does not change things, at least for Dropbox/Google Drive. Stack Overflow is tons of posts like this: https://stackoverflow.com/questions/2199637/is-it-possible-t...

That said, I haven't tried this lately, maybe it's gotten more robust over time. But historically, even a bare repo on something like Dropbox has issues.

[1718627440]

Sure, but this seams to be more of an issue with Dropbox, not with Git, when I run a database on Dropbox, the same problems occur. I wouldn't trust these to even preserve file attributes correctly, so I would put things into a tarball, before uploading (optionally also encrypting).

[steveklabnik]

Sure, you could view it as Drobox's problem, but the core of it is that git relies on things that Dropbox doesn't support, while jj does not. And so it's usable more safely in more contexts.

I fully agree that this is a niche use-case.

[1718627440]

JJ works when an internal file is overwritten to another version, while it does an operation? I thought that's what we are discussing here.