Path: csiph.com!v102.xanadu-bbs.net!xanadu-bbs.net!feeder.erje.net!eu.feeder.erje.net!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail From: Tim Watts Newsgroups: uk.comp.os.linux,comp.os.linux.misc,uk.d-i-y Subject: Re: Opensource slowing down? "GoogleDrive" private cloud Date: Wed, 04 Mar 2015 15:08:08 +0000 Lines: 60 Message-ID: References: <4khjsb-2oj.ln1@squidward.dionic.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: individual.net 5uiIfqVqSgkzxT3QDEY9EQs+2T33lxvNa4gdZ2Qp1BGwBHVZH+ X-Orig-Path: squidward.dionic.net!not-for-mail Cancel-Lock: sha1:BZ3fJn8nWAIzLqRsTvrMhfCrRFs= User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.4.0 In-Reply-To: Xref: csiph.com comp.os.linux.misc:13876 On 04/03/15 14:53, Robert Heller wrote: > At Wed, 04 Mar 2015 14:32:04 +0000 Tim Watts wrote: > >> It is a specialist network filesystem - that is for sure. It strikes me >> as strange that there are 101 commercial suppliers (Dropbox, Google, >> Evernote, Spideroak...) and yet no one has come up with a nice well >> defined open protocol that addresses replication and syncing. > > What is sounds like is that you are looking for is something like subversion's > WebDAV-based protocol. The bits and pieces are there. WebDAV is reasonably > well documented. Subversion is open source, so one can have a look at what it > does. Hmm - I do wonder how that would scale with big binary files. But I agree, there is almost certainly something useful in the meta data that would assist sync-ing. if we dispensed with the ability to roll back and simply worried about every client's idea of the HEAD version, then it would be easy for clients to work out who had the most recent copy. But I think the mercurial logic would be better suited compared to SVN as Mercurial is an HTTP based version of Git and Git was designed from the ground up to be devoid of any central authority. > As others have said, programs like rsync seem to cover the bases that Linux > *Developers* are interested in. I suspect that few of the Linux *developers* > are interested in yet another pointy-clicky 'toy'. *I* certainly have no > interest in such a toy. With respect I would hardly describe it as a "toy" It is a real world problem. Case in point: 10 years ago my house had desktops, connected by NFS to a central server and all was well. Now, we have people (4) passing laptops, pads and phones around. And we may be needing a chromebook for the kids (schooling). NFS simply does not work. I find myself uploading stuff ad hoc to Google Drive just so SWMBO can look at a copy on her phone. if I don't get a solution in place we will have 7 devices with random bits of random peoples files all over them. Open source dev folk use pads and phones - maybe not Chromebooks - but I refuse to believe they are so stuck in the stone age they cannot see where the future is going. Right now it's a mess. This is most definitely a problem that needs a solution even if not everyone knows it yet.