Question #660463 on Duplicity changed:
https://answers.launchpad.net/duplicity/+question/660463
Status: Open => Answered
edso proposed the following answer:
On 11/11/2017 14:53, Konstantin Schubert wrote:
> Question #660463 on Duplicity changed:
> https://answers.launchpad.net/duplicity/+question/660463
>
> Konstantin Schubert gave more information on the question:
>
> I've got a few more questions. If the mailing list isn't the right place for
> them, let me know.
>
> First off, I want to say that I have high respect of code that is time
> proven and works, even if it's not written in the latest greatest
> language :)
>
> That being said, I still think that I'd be able to make some careful
> contributions.
>
> My first question:
> Would it be acceptable to raise the minimum required python version to 2?
>
> Second question:
> My impression is that the dup_time module is mainly used for parsing file
> names into an internal time representation and vice versa. Therefore, no
> matter what changes I make here, I'll have to be very careful not to break
> backwards compatibility in parsing the file names.
>
> I'd probably start working by writing tests for all the file name formats
> that need to be covered and then ask here on the list for confirmation that
> the tests are exhaustive.
> Afterwards, I can start work on refactoring the module by making use of
> datetime and pytz.
>
> Does that sound reasonable?
>
Konstantin,
it does. i am wondering tough why you want to rewrite a perfectly
functioning part of duplicity when there are bugs and feature request en
masse on launchpad already. just a tought.
..ede/duply.net
--
You received this question notification because your team duplicity-team
is an answer contact for Duplicity.
_______________________________________________
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~duplicity-team
Post to : [email protected]
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~duplicity-team
More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
