Re: [Duplicity-talk] Deprecation of pydrivebackend

[Kenneth Loafman]

Hi,

I started this thread because of this issue and because the pydrive backend has not been updated since 2016.  I did not expect such ranchor among the users, but it happens.  Let's keep things civil, please.

I see that pydrive2 is available for Python 3.8 and above, so it's really not compatible for all users of duplicity pre 2.0.  Now, the question is still about deprecation, but it seems that we need to settle first on one backend since pydrive and gdrive both do the same thing. If we need both, we need to understand why.  So, let's look at that and figure out an effective means of getting there.

BTW, the pydrive2 module would be a fit for duplicity-py3, a.k.a., duplicity 2.0, since we're dropping the EOL Python versions.

...Thanks,

...Ken

 

On Thu, Jun 22, 2023 at 7:50 AM edgar.soldin--- via Duplicity-talk <duplicity-talk@nongnu.org> wrote:

hey Jakob,

On 22.06.2023 13:12, Jakob Bohm via Duplicity-talk wrote:
> Dear Edgar,
>
> See comments inline below
>
>
> On 2023-06-21 16:52, edgar.soldin--- via Duplicity-talk wrote:
>> On 21.06.2023 15:50, Jakob Bohm via Duplicity-talk wrote:
>>> Dear Duplicity team,
>>
>> hey Jakob
>>
>>> For everyone except the few insiders participating in today's
>>> discussion, it is important to ensure that all explanation
>>> texts in manpage etc. do not assume facts not provided where
>>> that text is.
>>>
>>> In particular:
>>>
>>> A. The manpage snippet below refers to "the downloaded JSON", but
>>>    not when and where that download would come from.  If this is
>>>    part of unchanged text above that sentence then fine.
>>
>> feel free to contribute a better documentation. nobody here is getting paid and everything is done on a voluntary basis.
>>
> That is the standard asshole answer when someone comments on a
> proposed change.  In this case I was pointing out that the text
> (as quoted)contains a dangling pointer to text not in the quote
> and possibly not in the full manpage either.
>
>>> B. Discussions elsewhere seem to assume that everyone using GDrive
>>>    does so via a developer account.  Please update text (without
>>>    unstated assumptions) for ordinary users, including warning if
>>>    this is somehow against Google Policy.
>>
>> which discussions? i don't see Google policy violations, what do you mean exactly?
> Elsewhere in this thread, look around.

thanks, but no thanks. and again. which Google policy violations _exactly?_

>>
>>> C. Elsewhere William asks for migration instructions and got a
>>>    reply about "If he already did X", which is clearly specific to
>>>    William and not a part of any migration recipe that could be
>>>    used by others once the old URL Scheme is deprecated as indicated
>>>    by the thread subject.
>>
>> obviously the "migration instructions" as such do not exist. that is why he was referred to what little as documentation is available.
> However, William was clearly asking for such migration instruction to be
> written cooperatively in the mail thread, but was sidetracked by a reply
> entirely specific to William and not to anyone else.  This same thing often
> happens in other public fora, where a prototypical sufferer of a common
> problem is given a reply that only applies to their particular case, then the
> useless reply is marked as a solution for all other sufferers.

however, you complaining but not actually contributing is not helping nobody here. what happens often in old roman market places is no concern of mine :))

>>
>>>
>>> P.S.
>>>
>>> I happen to be currently using AWS S3 glacier via the boto3 code,
>>> and find similar readability problems in that documentation,
>>
>> same principle applies. if you are dissatisfied you are welcome to be part of a solution. general complaints will improve nothing.
>>
> I am stating that I am using the S3 situation as inspiration for
> my criticism of theGDrive situation, bug reports and potential
> patches for that may or may not come later.
>
>>> hence this mail about general principles seemingly about to get
>>> similarly mishandled for Google users.
>>
>> and again, please handle it better, if you feel inclined to. we are lacking human power all over and it unfortunately shows.
>>
> Again I was stating that the AWS S3 situation (which may or may
> not have its own forthcomming discussions) is merely inspiration
> for why I comment on how GDrive users are being treated. It's
> called empathy.

is it? also, i am still at loss what your end-goal is here. so far you did neither contribute to duplicity nor to the issue William is facing obviously.

please go ahead, create migration/setup-checklists/howtos and provide them. we will happily integrate them into the man page ideally replacing the admittedly insufficient documentation so far. apart from that i am not going to validate anymore general "Thinks gotta be better" statements.

kind regards ..ede


_______________________________________________
Duplicity-talk mailing list
Duplicity-talk@nongnu.org
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/duplicity-talk