From 43aad969264d1e8f9f10b2cf69b539e1bb0536bd Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: "http://joeyh.name/" Date: Thu, 23 May 2013 15:57:08 +0000 Subject: [PATCH] Added a comment --- .../comment_2_150ce8b7c4424a83c4b1760da5a89d27._comment | 8 ++++++++ 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+) create mode 100644 doc/bugs/Glacier_remote_uploads_duplicates/comment_2_150ce8b7c4424a83c4b1760da5a89d27._comment diff --git a/doc/bugs/Glacier_remote_uploads_duplicates/comment_2_150ce8b7c4424a83c4b1760da5a89d27._comment b/doc/bugs/Glacier_remote_uploads_duplicates/comment_2_150ce8b7c4424a83c4b1760da5a89d27._comment new file mode 100644 index 0000000000..859377308a --- /dev/null +++ b/doc/bugs/Glacier_remote_uploads_duplicates/comment_2_150ce8b7c4424a83c4b1760da5a89d27._comment @@ -0,0 +1,8 @@ +[[!comment format=mdwn + username="http://joeyh.name/" + nickname="joey" + subject="comment 2" + date="2013-05-23T15:57:08Z" + content=""" +I suppose another way to fix it along similar lines would be to make `git annex copy` always trust location tracking information when deciding whether to copy. I'm not sure how I feel about this though -- it might make things less robust in situations where `git annex copy` is run as a backup, and location tracking could have gotten out of date. +"""]]