[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Duplicity-talk] Deprecation of pydrivebackend
From: |
edgar . soldin |
Subject: |
Re: [Duplicity-talk] Deprecation of pydrivebackend |
Date: |
Thu, 22 Jun 2023 14:50:21 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.10.1 |
hey Jakob,
On 22.06.2023 13:12, Jakob Bohm via Duplicity-talk wrote:
Dear Edgar,
See comments inline below
On 2023-06-21 16:52, edgar.soldin--- via Duplicity-talk wrote:
On 21.06.2023 15:50, Jakob Bohm via Duplicity-talk wrote:
Dear Duplicity team,
hey Jakob
For everyone except the few insiders participating in today's
discussion, it is important to ensure that all explanation
texts in manpage etc. do not assume facts not provided where
that text is.
In particular:
A. The manpage snippet below refers to "the downloaded JSON", but
not when and where that download would come from. If this is
part of unchanged text above that sentence then fine.
feel free to contribute a better documentation. nobody here is getting paid and
everything is done on a voluntary basis.
That is the standard asshole answer when someone comments on a
proposed change. In this case I was pointing out that the text
(as quoted)contains a dangling pointer to text not in the quote
and possibly not in the full manpage either.
B. Discussions elsewhere seem to assume that everyone using GDrive
does so via a developer account. Please update text (without
unstated assumptions) for ordinary users, including warning if
this is somehow against Google Policy.
which discussions? i don't see Google policy violations, what do you mean
exactly?
Elsewhere in this thread, look around.
thanks, but no thanks. and again. which Google policy violations _exactly?_
C. Elsewhere William asks for migration instructions and got a
reply about "If he already did X", which is clearly specific to
William and not a part of any migration recipe that could be
used by others once the old URL Scheme is deprecated as indicated
by the thread subject.
obviously the "migration instructions" as such do not exist. that is why he was
referred to what little as documentation is available.
However, William was clearly asking for such migration instruction to be
written cooperatively in the mail thread, but was sidetracked by a reply
entirely specific to William and not to anyone else. This same thing often
happens in other public fora, where a prototypical sufferer of a common
problem is given a reply that only applies to their particular case, then the
useless reply is marked as a solution for all other sufferers.
however, you complaining but not actually contributing is not helping nobody
here. what happens often in old roman market places is no concern of mine :))
P.S.
I happen to be currently using AWS S3 glacier via the boto3 code,
and find similar readability problems in that documentation,
same principle applies. if you are dissatisfied you are welcome to be part of a
solution. general complaints will improve nothing.
I am stating that I am using the S3 situation as inspiration for
my criticism of theGDrive situation, bug reports and potential
patches for that may or may not come later.
hence this mail about general principles seemingly about to get
similarly mishandled for Google users.
and again, please handle it better, if you feel inclined to. we are lacking
human power all over and it unfortunately shows.
Again I was stating that the AWS S3 situation (which may or may
not have its own forthcomming discussions) is merely inspiration
for why I comment on how GDrive users are being treated. It's
called empathy.
is it? also, i am still at loss what your end-goal is here. so far you did
neither contribute to duplicity nor to the issue William is facing obviously.
please go ahead, create migration/setup-checklists/howtos and provide them. we will
happily integrate them into the man page ideally replacing the admittedly insufficient
documentation so far. apart from that i am not going to validate anymore general
"Thinks gotta be better" statements.
kind regards ..ede
- Re: [Duplicity-talk] Deprecation of pydrivebackend, (continued)
- Re: [Duplicity-talk] Deprecation of pydrivebackend, William, 2023/06/19
- Re: [Duplicity-talk] Deprecation of pydrivebackend, Kenneth Loafman, 2023/06/19
- Re: [Duplicity-talk] Deprecation of pydrivebackend, Chris McGinley, 2023/06/19
- Re: [Duplicity-talk] Deprecation of pydrivebackend, edgar . soldin, 2023/06/20
- Re: [Duplicity-talk] Deprecation of pydrivebackend, Chris McGinley, 2023/06/20
- Re: [Duplicity-talk] Deprecation of pydrivebackend, edgar . soldin, 2023/06/20
- Re: [Duplicity-talk] Deprecation of pydrivebackend, Chris McGinley, 2023/06/20
- Re: [Duplicity-talk] Deprecation of pydrivebackend, Jakob Bohm, 2023/06/21
- Re: [Duplicity-talk] Deprecation of pydrivebackend, edgar . soldin, 2023/06/21
- Re: [Duplicity-talk] Deprecation of pydrivebackend, Jakob Bohm, 2023/06/22
- Re: [Duplicity-talk] Deprecation of pydrivebackend,
edgar . soldin <=
- Re: [Duplicity-talk] Deprecation of pydrivebackend, Kenneth Loafman, 2023/06/23
- Re: [Duplicity-talk] Deprecation of pydrivebackend, edgar . soldin, 2023/06/23
- Re: [Duplicity-talk] Deprecation of pydrivebackend, William, 2023/06/20
- Re: [Duplicity-talk] Deprecation of pydrivebackend, edgar . soldin, 2023/06/20
- Re: [Duplicity-talk] Deprecation of pydrivebackend, William, 2023/06/20
- Re: [Duplicity-talk] Deprecation of pydrivebackend, edgar . soldin, 2023/06/21
- Re: [Duplicity-talk] Deprecation of pydrivebackend, edgar . soldin, 2023/06/21