title: Mercurial (and, I guess Git) with Dropbox: any drawbacks?
body: <p>I have a Mercurial repository for a personal project, and I have been storing the master repository in my Dropbox for a few weeks now (something along <a href="http://iamthewalr.us/blog/2009/02/mercurial-and-dropbox/" rel="nofollow noreferrer">this line</a>; and I understand it's also <a href="https://stackoverflow.com/questions/1960799/using-gitdropbox-together-effectively">possible with git</a>). </p>
  
  <p>The idea is that it serves both as a way to work with multiple machines and as a remote backup. <em>I clone the repository and work on the non-Dropbox copy, and only push updates once in a while, the same way I would, I suppose, work with Bitbucket.</em> </p>
  
  <p>Can you think of any drawbacks to this idea, compared to using dedicating hosting (BitBucket in the case of Mercurial)? <em>I know Bitbucket has free accounts for single users, which is great, but they are limited to 150M, which isn't a huge</em>. </p>
  
  <p>In particular, is it possible that Dropbox's sync process would corrupt the repository? I had to run <em>hg recover</em> once on the master repository, but it might be unrelated (and anyway it happily recovered). Does anyone have a bad experience with the idea? Does anyone have a longer good experience and can alleviate my worries? Does anyone have an opinion based on better understanding of the internals of these things?</p>
  
  <p>edit: I added some clarifications to the questions. They are in <em>italics</em>. </p>