Dear Ed Pimentl: On Thursday, 2010-02-04, at 20:43 , EdPimentl wrote:
> Hello Distinquished members of this list. > > I have decided to double ($800.00 USD) the bounty for: > - FUSE like layer > - SMB by default for Windows > - SFTP by default (localhost) for *nix That's really great that you're offering bounties for Tahoe-LAFS improvements. Thank you! But do you mean that you'll pay someone $800.00 USD when they've done all three of those things, or any one of them, or what? By a "FUSE like layer", what do you mean exactly? I guess you mean that you can navigate and manipulate your Tahoe-LAFS files using your standard tools: fopen(), fread(), etc. in C and ls, mv etc. in a shell. Is that right? Let's write down exactly what the criteria are in a ticket so we can tell when we've succeeded. Note that we already have tests thanks to Nathan Wilcox, Rob Kinninmont, François Deppierraz and David-Sarah Hopwood which can tell us how complete a FUSE implementation is: http://allmydata.org/trac/tahoe/browser/contrib/fuse/runtests.py So, other ways to achieve the same thing -- fopen(), fread(), ls, mv -- would be to implement SFTP and use sshfs (http:// fuse.sourceforge.net/sshfs.html ) to provide the filesystem interface, or implement WebDAV and use davfs2 (http:// savannah.nongnu.org/projects/davfs2 ) to provide the filesystem interface. Now it turns out that we already have an SFTP implementation, but it lacks test and some people claim that it doesn't work for them: http://allmydata.org/trac/tahoe/ticket/531 Alberto Berti contributed a patch to make it work for him, but then Ryan Heimbuchs said that this patch made it break for him. So the next thing we need is tests of Alberto's and Ryan's issues. Regards, Zooko _______________________________________________ tahoe-dev mailing list [email protected] http://allmydata.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tahoe-dev
