Why not just use BitBucket? It's free and reliable and is meant as a repository manager. And trusted like GitHub, but BitBucket also gives you unlimited public AND private repos. Did I mention free?
Looks good, I had previously used Dropbox for personal repositories, but now I might try using them for shared ones.<p>It seems from a quick read of the design document [1] that the important thing here is the updating of refs using a compare-and-swap, ensuring that the synchronisation issues that typically occur with using Dropbox as a remote cannot occur. Objects are always* safe from this since the file names are SHA1 hashes.<p>Edit: The only downside I can see with this is that the remote will never have garbage collection take place, so unreachable objects will continue to take up space indefinitely.<p>[1]: <a href="https://github.com/anishathalye/git-remote-dropbox/blob/master/DESIGN.md" rel="nofollow">https://github.com/anishathalye/git-remote-dropbox/blob/mast...</a>
Just curious... Given that we have gitlab, bitbucket, assembla, etc. which provide free private git hosting and even more services if you don't need private repo - why would anyone host on dropbox?
Seeing all those "why not use X instead" makes me wonder why it appears to be a binary option? Git lets you use ALL of them. You can push to multiple remotes and even automate things with hooks if you need to. Perfect for backup and redundancy in case any single remote is unavailable...
This is also really useful<p>How to Use S3 as a Private Git Repository<p><a href="http://www.fancybeans.com/blog/2012/08/24/how-to-use-s3-as-a-private-git-repository/" rel="nofollow">http://www.fancybeans.com/blog/2012/08/24/how-to-use-s3-as-a...</a>
Or you know pay $5 and host your git repositories at Digital Ocean or some other VPS provider. I honestly don't get this obsession of tacking on git on top of things like Dropbox. If you're technical enough to understand git then you're technical enough to set up your own hosting server. Just skip the middleman.
Shameless plug: If you want the data in dropbox encrypted, try <a href="https://github.com/lucas-clemente/git-cr" rel="nofollow">https://github.com/lucas-clemente/git-cr</a> :) I think I've also solved most of the concurrency problems, but haven't tested it yet.
bare git on dropbox is not dangerous in a multi user setup. I tested it a few years ago, the conflicts are minor annoyances but never destructive nor silent.<p><a href="http://edinburghhacklab.com/2012/11/when-git-on-dropbox-conflicts-no-problem/" rel="nofollow">http://edinburghhacklab.com/2012/11/when-git-on-dropbox-conf...</a>
Hmmm. I've been storing Git repos in Dropbox for... ages. Haven't tried sharing them, but for a single user I see no need to have an additional piece of software.<p>I am, however, quite interested in the potential for business-related repos - I guess it all depends on the authentication and transport mechanisms (I assume this will be using Dropbox's auth and TLS API)?
I am a bit confused.<p>This only represents server side right?<p>You are still not expected to leave the working directory in the Dropbox folder?<p>Reason i ask - Dropbox's client is very inefficient when it comes to small files.
I used to mock people for using Dropbox for deployment (by configuring the document root as the dropbox folder).<p>I hope they won't discover if I start using this.