Re: [Dirssync-opendisc] dfp directory synchronizer

[Mark C. <xs...@uk...>]

--- vincent delft <vin...@ya...> wrote:

> But it seems that DirsSync was the oldest overall
> synchronisation tool ;-) (this is a stupid comments,
> but serve my ego)

But think of it this way: dfp should allow synchronization over FTP, tar files, and what-have-you. It would be able to deduce more about what files need synchronization (because it takes snapshots). It could be used as a backup program. With a bit of coaxing, it might even be usable as a CVS tool (after all, isn't CVS a form of synchronisation?). And because someone else is doing the work, it would mean more results for less work.


> I think that the other tool (in ASPN : robotcopy) is
> exactly what we are doing.

This brings up the subject of code rewriting. In general, I would be sceptical about rewriting. We already have something that works. PyRobocopy doesn't provide us with more features (I think that it even provides us with less - because it doesn't exclude files/directories).

I only had a quick glance though the code, but it semms that PyRobocopy is written to a high standard. Even if the code we have written is less than perfect, that does not necessarily mean we should scrap it. It can be iteratively refined as we go. If you have a look at the mod docs that are generated by dirssync, then I think that the way that it can be automated, for instance, isn't too bad. Maybe it's not perfect, but it is usable.

> About that I've no news. ??!!??;;??

I've no news either.


_____________________________________________________________
Sign up for your very own email  address from UKmail.com To-day !!