On 16/05/2016 22:05, Stephen Joyce wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Thanks to Lars and Mauro. It's great that you've taken this on.
>
> FWIW, I contacted Craig directly last week and received a reply over
> the weekend. It sounds like he's quite busy, and does not regularly
> read these lists, but he still hopes to be able to contribute more in
> the future (ie, review updates and releases).
>
> He also mentioned that the one remaining feature he had planned for
> 4.0 before it became beta was FTP. Unless there is a large demand
> among users for FTP, I'm unsure it should hold up the beta label.
> Thoughts?
>
I would definitely suggest that the lack of FTP backup support in v4 is
a non-issue. I think the huge majority of users are using one of rsync,
tar or smb (I could be wrong, but based on the emails we see on the list
regarding the various backup methods....). In addition, if any user of
FTP finds that such a feature is so important, then they will need to
find a way to implement the feature. Craig clearly has no plans to work
on the feature (or should I say no time available), so waiting for this
feature could easily take another 5 years or more.
There are known bugs in v4, and it would be nice to get those fixed
before releasing a 4.0 (even though we all know that the .0 release is
buggy, we should at least remove the known bugs first).
> In any event, since the sourceforge pages are currently the 'official'
> location where new users land (and where distros look for new code), I
> asked him to make me an admin on the sourceforge project page. So if
> changes are needed there, including a link to patched and/or
> bleeding-edge source on github before it makes it into an official
> release, I can do that. I'm also amenable to a few other regular
> contributors having admin as long as they have the time, inclination,
> and ability to help out.
I would suggest that a number of projects have moved away from
sourceforge, and it may be a good time to do that. Why not just repoint
the source repository from sourceforge CVS to github? I'm not sure if
you can post "releases" on github, but I think it could be better to do
that as well. Removing the reliance on sourceforge from the project.
However, having some edit access to sourceforge makes this a non-issue,
so whatever is easiest. Just remember that regardless of intentions now,
in 5+ years, we still need multiple active contributors who will have
write access to both github and sourceforge.
>
> I think if it's eventually officiallyhosted on github, it's important
> to leave the door open for Craig to assist when/if time permits.
Can we simply add Craig to the github, where he would also have access
to add patches, or make releases as needed. I'm sure I am not alone in
saying that we would all be ecstatic to see even an occasional patch or
update from him, he is clearly very talented having created the project
that so many people want to use.
PS, I would vote that the project name is kept as BackupPC, and even
continue with the version number schemes (unless Craig objects to
either/both of those). It will keep it simple for all the users, and it
very much reflects the fact that 99.9% of the source code is identical.
So adding a couple of patches and releasing a 3.4.0, and similarly
adding some patches and releasing a 4.0.0beta1 (considering the amount
of testing done to date, I don't think it needs to be considered alpha
anymore).
PPS, I want to be clear, I think Craig has done an awesome job, and can
understand that he would like some ability to continue to father his
project, which I think we would all like and appreciate. Like any child,
the project is now very mature, and widely used, and needs to "grow up",
it needs to become bigger than any one person (or two or three), just
like Linux. If Craig is realistically able to regularly approve patches,
similar to Linus, then perfect, but in case that doesn't happen, lets
have a few others that can.
Finally, I've created a github account for myself, I can't promise to do
much, but if I can at least have the ability to submit patches, then I'd
appreciate it. Having never worked with github before (other than
checking out code to use), is there an ability to have (for example) 10
people active on the project, where any one of them can submit patches,
and commit patches, but each user can't commit their own patch? Just to
ensure some level of community review?
Regards,
Adam
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mobile security can be enabling, not merely restricting. Employees who
bring their own devices (BYOD) to work are irked by the imposition of MDM
restrictions. Mobile Device Manager Plus allows you to control only the
apps on BYO-devices by containerizing them, leaving personal data untouched!
https://ad.doubleclick.net/ddm/clk/304595813;131938128;j
_______________________________________________
BackupPC-users mailing list
BackupPC-users AT lists.sourceforge DOT net
List: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/backuppc-users
Wiki: http://backuppc.wiki.sourceforge.net
Project: http://backuppc.sourceforge.net/
|
