Re: [rdiff-backup-users] Maintenance

[Edward Ned Harvey]

> From: Dominic Raferd [mailto:address@hidden
> 
> I might
> be able to get you an email address for him though. Failing that I guess
you
> could create a fork.

Thanks, I was able to reach Ben Escoto, who gave me an address for Andrew @
princeton.edu.  Ben has long since been a non-maintainer, but he at least
still has admin access to the project, so if Andrew proves to be unavailable
for some reason, we should be able to at least able to resurrect access
without being forced into the fork.  

That was only today, so the fact that I don't have a response yet is
irrelevant.  The fact that I don't have a bounce yet is highly relevant.
;-)  Still, if you've got another address for Andrew, that would be
appreciated.


> There is a wish-list somewhere (quite a long and old one I'm afraid). 

That's the thing about volunteer effort.  People are motivated to work on
whatever they care about.   ;-)


> Some of the recurrent issues relate to backups to/on Windows filesystems
or
> saving/recovering Windows ACLs. 

Unfortunately, I think I'm unlikely to focus much on the windows side of
things...  I personally pay $17 to goodsync once every couple of years and
I'm happy with that for windows.


> One serious failing in rdiff-backup is
> its verification procedures which are rather inadequate.

That does sound important.  Could you expand?  (I haven't dug into source
much yet.)


> Someone else looked at the rdiff-backup codebase a while back and said it
> was very untidy and repetitious and they lost interest in updating it.
Just
> warning you before you get stuck in! But you would be performing a great
> service...

Yeah, in the quick look I had already at the source code, there seemed to be
a lot of indirection ... Which is confusing without a map, but if there's a
good block diagram illustrating the interfaces between the zillion tiny
little classes etc, that goes a long way toward making it all clear.