duplicity-team team mailing list archive

[edgar.soldin@xxxxxx]

On 17.09.2009 22:51, Michael Terry wrote:
> There are two main ways of currently dealing with duplicity's core:
> Python module (used by duplicity and time-drive) and CLI/logging (used
> by duply and deja-dup).  I'll note though, that duply doesn't actually
> use the logging side of things.  I'm the only log consumer.
>    

true, but I am really grateful it's there. Because it gives duply the 
possibility to interpret what duplicity is saying. Not much use now. But 
for what I am planning it is essential.
E.g. possibility to restore time frames (incl. deleted files) realizable 
by listing each backup and restore from oldest to the newest
or search files in all backups function and show available versions with 
backups date

> (B) Do we need two?  I'm willing to drop the logging in favor of a
> pure module approach, with the goal of porting Deja Dup to Python at
> some point.  But keeping it for now makes my life easier, since I
> already have all the code written.  Edgar, I don't know if you had
> plans to use logging.  If we want to encourage non-Python wrappers, we
> would need to keep it.
>    

some plans are mentioned above. And you are totally right and that's why 
we agreed on the file descriptor logging. It is simple and compatible.
If it would be removed I'd to gather the information from the text 
output. Unconvenient but not impossible.
Eventually. I advise against removing it :)

> [1] This reminds me, as we are getting more frontends, it might be
> nice to have a more official section on the duplicity website for
> frontends.  Maybe a section in the left nav bar, with a quick
> description of each and what the target audiences are.
>    

nice idea ... ede