Em Fri, May 11, 2012 at 09:53:41AM +0200, Paul van Tilburg escreveu: > On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 09:50:40PM -0300, rhatto wrote: > > Em Thu, May 10, 2012 at 12:45:08PM +0200, intrigeri escreveu: > > > If the rsync handler is not in a good enough state on May 20th yet, > > > I'll release backupninja 1.0 *without* the rsync handler, > > > and upload it to Debian sid. > > > > Seems fair and I hope we can do it. > > I agree. I must say that with the recent patches it seems to work for > me. The other things we recently discusses are cosmetics. > > I actually disagree with #3929 though, now I think of it. The date of > the daily/weekly/monthly dirs is valueable, otherwise there is now way > to tell when the backup is made. (At least, I frequently use it to > check how things are going).
I would like to know Intrigeri's opinion about that, but generally I think that leaving the folder dates untouched can led to more confusion than clarification. > > I just cycled over all backupninja rsync issues[1], checked their status > > and made the needed commits so now I think we can test a rsync handler > > candidate for the 1.0 release. > > > > I merged all my recent work in my rsync branch[2] which right now is merged > > with master. > > > > So the rsync handler can be either tested from the current code at my rsync > > branch[3] or use a diff from from backupinja shipped on debian squeeze. > I would like to try it (and do a diff what the changes are), but the > host is unforunately down (or unreachable for me). Sorry, it was an unexpected downtime. It should be reachable now. -- rhatto at riseup.net pubkey 64E39FCA / keys.indymedia.org
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
