Request: Ability to sort recovery list

[Droolio]

@saspus

@Droolio

You can’t just come in and claim GCD somehow ‘doesn’t work’, because it wasn’t designed for the purpose, and insist it should be removed - when it’s patently untrue. It’s like saying your car broke down, therefore there’s a design flaw, with no evidence of such.

What’s untrue exactly? That it has high latency? That it does not perform well with millions of files?

What high latency? In what way - if that actually exists - does it prevent GCD from working with Duplicacy? It doesn’t.

In what way does it not perform well with millions of files? It doesn’t. I’m not aware of any such scaling bottleneck with GCD. If you’re referring to slow checks and prunes, with tens of thousands of revisions, you know full well this has nothing whatsoever to do with GCD and is a processing bottleneck that happens with any backend.

@saspus

That shared drive does no limit number of object?

Already known and accounted for. I don’t use Shared Drives, don’t need to - My Drive is perfectly suitable for the task. If I DID consider using it, 400k is plenty enough for most situations, and I can always bump the chunk size.

@saspus

That you either don’t pay for what you use or overpay, with no middle ground?

This is wrong. There are multiple tiers of Workspace which do provide a middle ground, and I can upgrade/downgrade at will. At present, I pay for the top tier Enterprise Plus ~ 23GBP/m - but ofc you’ll complain I’m not paying enough! Thankfully, this is not up to you.

@saspus

You’ve done some calculations, and concluded that for the time being it’s OK to abuse google storage

Again, enough with the unfounded nonsense. I do not abuse Google’s storage in any way.

@saspus

@Droolio

it’s entirely irrelevant to your claim that it’s ‘not designed for bulk data’.

These are two separate claims.

Precisely! You’re claiming GCD ‘wasn’t designed for bulk storage’, which is provably false. So now you change the goalposts and appeal to the ethics of ‘abusing’ a system which again, provably, isn’t happening. This is equivocating, because your argument against GCD is biased and weak.

@saspus

“The rest of the engine”, aka duplicacy on GitHub, is indeed good,

I was referring to the non-GUI related code, of the closed-source GUI.

There’s still a large amount of work that makes it tick, and using that as a starting point - even if to rewrite the visual framework - would be far better for any volunteer endeavour, than embarking on a total rewrite.

Legally, I’m sure a free-for-personal use custom-made GUI front end would be okay, but implicit permission to improve on the GUI, by releasing the source code, would be a far better proposition - regardless of how much of it needs to be rewritten. It can be iterated on, it does not need to be a total rewrite.

At the very least, basic UX improvements can be made on the existing stack, which is far more likely to happen with many hands than just the one.