Preamble: Obviously, the core feature of git-annex is the ability to keep a subset of files in a local repo. The main trade-off is that you don't get version tracking.
Use case: On my laptop, I might not have enough disk space to store everything. Not so for my main box nor my backup server. And I would really like to have proper version tracking for many of my files. Thus...
Wish: ...why not use git as a version backend? That way, I could just push all my stuff to the central instance(s) and have the best of both worlds. Depending on what backend is used in the local repos, it might make sense to define a list of supported client backends with pre-computed keys.
-- RichiH
Indeed, see add a git backend, where you and I have already discussed this idea. :)
With the new support for special remotes, which will be used by S3, it would be possible to make such a git repo, using bup, be a special remote. I think it would be pretty easy to implement now. Not a priority for me though.
On the plus side, the past me wanted exactly what I had in mind.
On the meh side, I really forgot about this conversation :/
When you say this todo is not a priority, does that mean there's no ETA at all and that it will most likely sleep for a long time? Or the almost usual "what the heck, I will just wizard it up in two lines of haskell"?
-- RichiH
Probably more like 150 lines of haskell. Maybe just 50 lines if the bup repository is required to be on the same computer as the git-annex repository.
Since I do have some repositories where I'd appreciate this level of assurance that data not be lost, it's mostly a matter of me finding a free day.