In Apr 5, 2008, at 11:45 PM, Doug Ransom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

On 4-Apr-08, at 3:02 PM, Rich Siegel wrote:

I suggest BareBones consider moving their data store out of the sqlite
database and store Yojimbo entries onto the file system.  The time
machine backups are getting rather large when the whole database is
backed up.

At the risk of sounding like a broken record, Yojimbo uses Core Data, which is a subsystem supplied by the OS for precisely the sort of data storage needs that Yojimbo has. The fact that Core Data uses sqlite is an implementation detail and is, by design, abstracted away from Core Data clients.

Since Core Data is a fundamental part of the OS, we leave it to Apple to make sure that it plays nicely with other relevant OS components. Since Time Machine is brand new and there are still lots of angles to figure out, I have every confidence that in the long term, Time Machine will evolve as necessary to accommodate the needs of Core Data clients.

From and uses perspective, Yojimbo is clearly missing the need for integration with state of the art backup available in Leopard - files that are changed are backed up. I am really not interested in whether you built Yobjimbo with CoreData and XML and C# and some thread pools or whatever. Leopard has been out a long time.

And still Apple doesn't get it right. I guess moving away from Core Data would be a major rewrite. It is Apple's fault and not Barebones. They are using an official API and Apple does not gets it developers support right. I do not want to know what they hacked together for making Aperture working with Time Machine


This message is sent to you because you are subscribed to
 the mailing list <>.
To unsubscribe, send mail to: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
List archives:  <>
Have a feature request, or not sure if the software's working correctly? Please send mail to: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

Reply via email to