On 08/09/15 18:34, Paul Rabahy wrote: > FYI, this ended up in my spam folder on gmail. Reposting to the list in case > others also > missed it. (Sorry I don't know the answer to your actual question) > > On Sun, Sep 6, 2015 at 6:07 PM, Raghunadha R Kotha <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > Hi > > I am new to Tahoe LAFS and a great product and excellent active team. I > was reviewing > the functionality and I have a question specially around cloud storage. > Currently the > cloud storage uses different storage providers. Ex, Google Cloud storage. > My question > is why it is using google storage API and not the google drive API? Are > there any > specific reason why the google storage API?
Initially the cloud backend was written for S3. Google Storage was supported because it is very similar to S3, so the amount of new code needed was small -- mainly to handle authentication. I don't know why Google made their Drive API completely different from S3. There's no great obstacle to writing a Drive backend, but we (LeastAuthority.com) weren't funded to do it as part of the RAIC project, so we didn't. (RAIC was already quite ambitious enough with four APIs to support.) -- Daira Hopwood ⚧Ⓐ
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ tahoe-dev mailing list [email protected] https://tahoe-lafs.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tahoe-dev
