followup; correct misleading comment
This commit is contained in:
parent
c99526dd41
commit
e11c324605
2 changed files with 14 additions and 1 deletions
|
@ -0,0 +1,13 @@
|
|||
[[!comment format=mdwn
|
||||
username="joey"
|
||||
subject="""comment 2"""
|
||||
date="2019-09-05T15:29:57Z"
|
||||
content="""
|
||||
That comment was just bad wording or possibly I conflated S3 with how other
|
||||
remotes that do use hash directories work. I've corrected the comment.
|
||||
|
||||
According to Amazon's documentation, S3 does not have a concept of
|
||||
directories; "foo/bar" and "foo_bar" and "foo\\bar" are all just opaque
|
||||
strings as far as it's concerned. So I don't see any point in using hash
|
||||
directories with S3.
|
||||
"""]]
|
|
@ -4,7 +4,7 @@
|
|||
subject="comment 8"
|
||||
date="2013-01-20T20:37:09Z"
|
||||
content="""
|
||||
If encryption is not used, the files are stored in S3 as-is, and can be accessed directly. They are stored in a hashed directory structure with the names of their key used, rather than the original filename. To get back to the original filename, a copy of the git repo would also be needed.
|
||||
If encryption is not used, the files are stored in S3 as-is, and can be accessed directly. The S3 bucket contains object named using the git-annex key, rather than the original filename. To get back to the original filename, a copy of the git repo would also be needed.
|
||||
|
||||
With encryption, you need the gpg key used in the encryption, or, for shared encryption, a symmetric key which is stored in the git repo.
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
Loading…
Add table
Add a link
Reference in a new issue