[tahoe-lafs-trac-stream] [Tahoe-LAFS] #1952: rename "tahoe backup" to "tahoe snapshot"

[Tahoe-LAFS]

#1952: rename "tahoe backup" to "tahoe snapshot"
---------------------------------+-----------------------------------------
     Reporter:  zooko            |      Owner:
         Type:  enhancement      |     Status:  new
     Priority:  normal           |  Milestone:  undecided
    Component:  code-frontend-   |    Version:  1.9.2
  cli                            |   Keywords:  tahoe-backup usability docs
   Resolution:                   |
Launchpad Bug:                   |
---------------------------------+-----------------------------------------

Old description:

> {{{tahoe backup}}} is a good tool! It does a really cool thing. However,
> it doesn't do "backup". Proof: there is no {{{tahoe restore}}}. If you
> were try to simulate "restore" by running {{{tahoe cp -r}}}, it would be
> unable to do all sorts of things that you expect from a backup-and-
> restore program, such as restoring symlinks, restoring mtime and ctime,
> restoring uid and gid, or delta-compressing between subsequent versions.
>
> Maybe we should rename {{{tahoe backup}}} to {{{tahoe snapshot}}}. Then
> people who want backup would stop complaining that {{{tahoe backup}}} is
> a crummy backup tool, they would start using a **good** backup tool (such
> as duplicati+Tahoe-LAFS), and they would start using the newly created
> {{{tahoe snapshot}}} tool for its cool snapshot-making behavior.
>
> See comment:13:ticket:1946, comment:14:ticket:1946.

New description:

 {{{tahoe backup}}} is a good tool! It does a really cool thing. However,
 it doesn't do "backup". Proof: there is no {{{tahoe restore}}}. If you
 were try to simulate "restore" by running {{{tahoe cp -r}}}, it would be
 unable to do all sorts of things that you expect from a backup-and-restore
 program, such as restoring symlinks, restoring mtime and ctime, restoring
 uid and gid, or delta-compressing between subsequent versions.

 Maybe we should rename {{{tahoe backup}}} to {{{tahoe snapshot}}}. Then
 people who want backup would stop complaining that {{{tahoe backup}}} is a
 crummy backup tool, they would start using a **good** backup tool (such as
 duplicati+Tahoe-LAFS), and they would start using the newly created
 {{{tahoe snapshot}}} tool for its cool snapshot-making behavior.

 See comment:13:ticket:1946, comment:14:ticket:1946.

--

Comment (by ambimorph):

 I just went through a similar experience as described in
 [https://github.com/LeastAuthority/leastauthority.com/issues/196 Taylor's
 S4 Usability Notes] for the tahoe-LAFS part in terms of managing the
 interfaces (both web and command line), and trying to not so much
 *restore* but even *find* the files that I backed up.  I independently
 discovered this same discussion about backup vs. snapshot, and `tahoe cp
 -r`.

 I now don't understand why I would ever use `backup` instead of `cp -r`,
 if I want to be able to navigate the files later.  It also took me a long
 time to figure out how to get the top level directory included in the
 `cp`, by repeating the name of it after the alias.

--
Ticket URL: <https://tahoe-lafs.org/trac/tahoe-lafs/ticket/1952#comment:8>
Tahoe-LAFS <https://Tahoe-LAFS.org>
secure decentralized storage