id	summary	reporter	owner	description	type	status	priority	milestone	component	version	resolution	keywords	cc	launchpad_bug
2919	Encourage folks to use a third-party backup tool with Tahoe-LAFS integration instead of `tahoe backup`	exarkun		"There are many backup tools for all major platforms.  Many of them are quite good (support sophisticated backup scenarios, have good user experience, good failure recovery, good documentation, active and ongoing development, etc).  Compared to many of these, `tahoe backup` is primitive, unreliable, and difficult to use.

I have no doubt that continued development on `tahoe backup` *could* turn it into a world-class backup tool.  However, I have some doubts about whether there is any compelling reason to invest these resources in application development that's not core to the privacy and security goals of Tahoe-LAFS.

Instead, what seems reasonable, is that efforts could be focused on integrating Tahoe-LAFS into one or more of these existing tools to provide a high-quality (private, secure, distributed, available) storage engine to complement the existing backup application functionality they already provide.

This allows Tahoe-LAFS development efforts to primarily focus on Tahoe-LAFS core values and backup application development efforts to focus on backup functionality - the best of both worlds.

Therefore, identify a major backup tool with an extensible storage engine (for each major platform) and update the `tahoe backup` documentation to refer users to those tools.  If users meet with success in their use of these tools, consider eventually deprecating `tahoe backup` entirely (with an eye toward removing it and the corresponding maintenance burden).
"	enhancement	new	normal	undecided	code-frontend-cli	1.12.1		tahoe-backup docs