2

I was updating my emacs backup approach using ideas from answers to this question, but I'm left unsure by one aspect, namely: the fact that several of them arrange to have backups placed in a single backup directory. So they might have something like:

(setq backup-directory-alist `(("." . "~/.emacs.d/backups")))

That's in contrast to what I've been doing up until now, with each "actual" directory having it's own backup directory, using something like:

(setq backup-directory-alist `(("." . "backups")))

That has seemed sensible to me since it keeps any given file's backups close to it in the filesystem. As a result, if and when I need a copy of a backup, I just drop into ./backups instead of having to climb out of whatever Mines of Moria-esque subdir I've been working in, drag my sorry a*se all the way over to ~/.emacs.d/backups or the like, and then dive into a haystack of mostly unrelated files with blindingly !-infested full pathnames, to find the needle that is my desired backup. Not to mention the fact that backing up to a single directory creates a risk that sensitive files may get backed up to a place with less than sensitive permissions.

Nevertheless, reading around the topic I now get the impression that the single directory approach may in fact be the norm, and that I'm the weirdo.

So what am I missing? Is there some gotcha to the per-directory approach? Or some really useful benefit with the single directory approach? Or both? Or what?

1
  • 1
    The question is too broad, and encourages opinion-based answers. It should be closed, IMO. Consider raising such an open question on a discussion sites such as Reddit, instead.
    – Drew
    Nov 6, 2021 at 21:53

2 Answers 2

5

There is no accounting for taste.

6
  • I'm really hoping that's not all there is to it, but I won't be surprised if you're right. +1 anyway.
    – tkp
    Nov 4, 2021 at 23:23
  • 4
    That should be a comment, not an answer.
    – NickD
    Nov 5, 2021 at 12:16
  • 2
    This does not provide an answer to the question. To critique or request clarification from an author, leave a comment below their post. - From Review
    – NickD
    Nov 5, 2021 at 12:21
  • 1
    @NickD, you're probably right, from an SE point of view anyway (which, yes, is what matters here). That said, as the question's author I do take some value from db48x's quip. It really is possible that there is little or no significance in the choice I'm asking about, in which case, just as with a question like "Why, after pouring their milk into their tea, do some people stir clockwise, and some anti-clockwise?", a good, if not the best answer may well be what is tantamount to a verbal shrug. 🙂
    – tkp
    Nov 5, 2021 at 16:33
  • 1
    I stand by my answer that it is purely a matter of taste, but you’re welcome to answer as well if you can think of a better one.
    – db48x
    Nov 5, 2021 at 19:40
0

Personal taste as to which you find more convenient is the correct answer (I find the single central folder feels more convenient).

The only practical difference I can think of is if you're editing a file on a different filesystem to ~ and that filesystem has limited space (or maybe slow performance e.g. a floppy) you don't burn up that space with backups. Probably more of a concern 20 years ago than today since everybody seems to have more storage than atoms in the universe these days.......

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.