On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 10:29:37PM -0600, Les Mikesell wrote: > On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 10:05 PM, Steve M. Robbins <st...@sumost.ca> wrote: > >> > >>> rsync(1), you'll agree that the matter of specifying exclude and include > >> patterns is rather complex. This is clearly beyond the scope of config.pl > >> (or > >> BackupPC.pod). > > > > Perhaps. As a user, however, I'd vastly prefer a configuration > > language that would abstract away all the varying details so that > > But such an abstraction could only use the lowest common denominator > of capabilities...
Maybe. Or maybe it could emulate something more sophisticated. > > 1. I do not have to read the manpage for tar or rsync or smb, and > > And administrators already familiar with their tools would have to > learn yet another way to express what they want... For sure, there is a tradeoff. Opinions will vary. All I'm saying is that my bias is towards a uniform interface -- perhaps because I don't already have familiarity with rsync or tar. Regards, -Steve
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
------------------------------------------------------------------------------ All the data continuously generated in your IT infrastructure contains a definitive record of customers, application performance, security threats, fraudulent activity, and more. Splunk takes this data and makes sense of it. IT sense. And common sense. http://p.sf.net/sfu/splunk-novd2d
_______________________________________________ BackupPC-devel mailing list BackupPC-devel@lists.sourceforge.net List: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/backuppc-devel Wiki: http://backuppc.wiki.sourceforge.net Project: http://backuppc.sourceforge.net/
