From ecd534f1eef4523886d12fd5c5421a7eb98a1743 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Joey Hess Date: Wed, 30 May 2018 11:28:38 -0400 Subject: [PATCH] response --- ...ent_1_6e8e3350ae26b6c59daa56b7e86cc46a._comment | 14 ++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+) create mode 100644 doc/forum/Migrate_from_one_connection_mechanism_for_special_remote_to_another/comment_1_6e8e3350ae26b6c59daa56b7e86cc46a._comment diff --git a/doc/forum/Migrate_from_one_connection_mechanism_for_special_remote_to_another/comment_1_6e8e3350ae26b6c59daa56b7e86cc46a._comment b/doc/forum/Migrate_from_one_connection_mechanism_for_special_remote_to_another/comment_1_6e8e3350ae26b6c59daa56b7e86cc46a._comment new file mode 100644 index 0000000000..e3a63b3f91 --- /dev/null +++ b/doc/forum/Migrate_from_one_connection_mechanism_for_special_remote_to_another/comment_1_6e8e3350ae26b6c59daa56b7e86cc46a._comment @@ -0,0 +1,14 @@ +[[!comment format=mdwn + username="joey" + subject="""comment 1""" + date="2018-05-30T15:21:57Z" + content=""" +Yes, there is an intermediate encryption key. + +What may work is to use `git annex enableremote` on the original remote +with `externaltype=rclone`, which will make it use the other program. + +Whether this will work depends on implementation details of both special +remotes. If they use the same names/urls/whatever to access the data stored +in them, it should work. +"""]]