Migrating a Dyalog v18.0 workspace to Link: which side should be the source of truth during two-way sync?

We are moving an existing Dyalog APL v18.0 codebase from a binary workspace to Link's text-file workflow so we can use Git and standard editors. Link's two-way synchronisation means edits in the session can be written to disk and external file edits are picked up by the session, which raises a governance question during the transition period.

While some developers still work in the session and others edit files directly, it is unclear which side should be treated as authoritative. Operations like Create, Import, Export, and Refresh control direction, but the risk is that a stale definition on one side silently overwrites newer work on the other. We also know some object types may not round-trip cleanly through text source, which complicates trusting the files as canonical.

Should the text files become the source of truth immediately, with the workspace treated as disposable, or is a phased approach safer? Which Link operations are appropriate for enforcing a one-way flow during migration? How do teams handle objects that do not serialise cleanly when declaring the files authoritative?