using bazaar for backup and synchronization of home

Sat Sep 15 16:20:58 UTC 2012

Thank you Kevin! That was just what I was looking for.

gary furash, mba | furashgary at gmail.com, 520-907-2470 |
http://beknown.com/gary-furash, share @ http://bit.ly/PdIofA

-----Original Message-----
From: bazaar-bounces at lists.canonical.com
[mailto:bazaar-bounces at lists.canonical.com] On Behalf Of
bazaar-request at lists.canonical.com
Sent: Saturday, September 15, 2012 5:00 AM
To: bazaar at lists.canonical.com
Subject: bazaar Digest, Vol 91, Issue 16

Send bazaar mailing list submissions to
	bazaar at lists.canonical.com

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
	https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/bazaar
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
	bazaar-request at lists.canonical.com

You can reach the person managing the list at
	bazaar-owner at lists.canonical.com

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than
"Re: Contents of bazaar digest..."

Today's Topics:

   1. using bazaar for backup and synchronization of home directory
      (Gary Furash)
   2. RE: using bazaar for backup and synchronization of home
      directory (Bulgrien, Kevin)
   3. Re: Bzr development stopped (Brian de Alwis)
   4. Re: using bazaar for backup and synchronization of home
      directory (Barry Warsaw)
   5. Re: Bzr development stopped (Martin Pool)

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message: 1
Date: Fri, 14 Sep 2012 09:48:29 -0700
From: "Gary Furash" <furashgary at gmail.com>
To: <bazaar at lists.canonical.com>
Subject: using bazaar for backup and synchronization of home directory
Message-ID: <000001cd9298$c5cea170$516be450$@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;	charset="us-ascii"

1. has anyone tried backing up some or all of their "home" directory
(whatever you consider that to be) to a bazaar repository? That way, you
would have (1) an automated backup and (b) great history and (c) easy
synchronization across devices.
2. if you don't have a network server, could you make the core repository on
a portable drive or some such? I know you can do that with svn.
3. would 1 prohibit you from using your companies' source control sytem
(e.g., git) for subsets of items

gary furash, mba | furashgary at gmail.com, 520-907-2470 |
http://beknown.com/gary-furash, documents @ http://bit.ly/PdIofA

------------------------------

Message: 2
Date: Fri, 14 Sep 2012 12:24:44 -0500
From: "Bulgrien, Kevin" <Kevin.Bulgrien at GDSATCOM.com>
To: "bazaar at lists.canonical.com" <bazaar at lists.canonical.com>
Subject: RE: using bazaar for backup and synchronization of home
	directory
Message-ID:
	<83894A1821034948BA27FE4DAA4742792DDEC2C5E5 at apde03.APD.Satcom.Local>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

> -----Original Message-----
> From: bazaar-bounces at lists.canonical.com
> [mailto:bazaar-bounces at lists.canonical.com] On Behalf Of Gary Furash
> Sent: Friday, September 14, 2012 11:48 AM
> To: bazaar at lists.canonical.com
> Subject: using bazaar for backup and synchronization of home directory
>
> 1. has anyone tried backing up some or all of their "home" directory 
> (whatever you consider that to be) to a bazaar repository?
> That way, you
> would have (1) an automated backup and (b) great history and (c) easy 
> synchronization across devices.

Yes. (Some vs. all).  I started doing this on Windows at work when I
realized that IT did not back up my workstation, but when I realized that
meant a drive failure jeopardized certain things I depend on day to day.
For example, I get to back up my "Favorites" collected and sorted over ten
years.  A bonus was that I could easily take them to other machines through
the VCS.

> 2. if you don't have a network server, could you make the core 
> repository on a portable drive or some such? I know you can do that 
> with svn.

Yes.  Though I use a server, it's really just another type of media that is
only different from removable media in the way it is connected.  What I do
is to create a shared-repo somewhere with a name like like "systems".  I
then make a repos under it called, for instance, linux, windows_xp, and
somesuch so I can maintain environments that are quite different.  I then
tend to make light-checkouts to avoid having duplicates on my file system
(I'm not bothered by the fact that if the repo is on a network resource that
it is slower, because I don't create changes frequently).  When using
removable media, then maybe that suggests your home directory should be a
heavy-checkout unless you expect to always have that media mounted when you
do VCS operations.

> 3. would 1 prohibit you from using your companies' source control 
> sytem (e.g., git) for subsets of items

No, I use another VCS underneath that "home" folder with no issues.

This message and/or attachments may include information subject to GD
Corporate Policy 07-105 and is intended to be accessed only by authorized
personnel of General Dynamics and approved service providers.  Use, storage
and transmission are governed by General Dynamics and its policies.
Contractual restrictions apply to third parties.  Recipients should refer to
the policies or contract to determine proper handling.  Unauthorized review,
use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited.  If you are not an intended
recipient, please contact the sender and destroy all copies of the original
message.

------------------------------

Message: 3
Date: Fri, 14 Sep 2012 13:28:12 -0400
From: Brian de Alwis <briandealwis at gmail.com>
To: Stephen J. Turnbull <stephen at xemacs.org>
Cc: Bazaar users <bazaar at lists.canonical.com>
Subject: Re: Bzr development stopped
Message-ID: <CA388962-5276-497C-B177-1E29857D2FB7 at gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252

On 13-Sep-2012, at 10:28 PM, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
> I don't understand your point in the context of this subthread.

It was about the deeper context as to why Canonical requested copyright
assignment.  And they *used to* request copyright assignment.  The
contributor agreement I signed (v2.5) says very clearly:

	1. I hereby assign to Canonical with full title guarantee all
	copyright now or in the future subsisting in any part of the
	world in any Assigned Contributions. [?]

Looks like they've since changed to a Harmony license, which does not ask
for copyright assignment, but Section 2.3 provides Canonical the ability to
relicense the contribution.  I don't remember hearing about this change of
agreement though.

	http://www.canonical.com/contributors

http://www.canonical.com/sites/default/files/active/images/Canonical-HA-CLA-
ANY-I.pdf

That's a big change!

Brian.

On 13-Sep-2012, at 10:28 PM, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
> Brian de Alwis writes:
>> On 12-Sep-2012, at 1:44 PM, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
> 
>>> So what?  That's not the Canonical contributor agreement, which 
>>> involves no transfer of copyright.
>> 
>> It is a consequence of the GPL which considers linking (such as with 
>> plugins) to invoke a derivative work.  By having ownership over bzr, 
>> Canonical can grant an alternative license to itself (and others) to 
>> allow linking to proprietary extensions without invoking the GPL.
> 
> I don't understand your point in the context of this subthread.  We 
> are discussing Canonical's contributor agreement as a (non-) inhibitor 
> of contributions.  Matthieu proposed the attempted bzr/hg merger as an 
> example where we know this had a major effect.  I'm explaining why 
> "Canonical owns the copyright" means this is *not* a relevant example.

------------------------------

Message: 4
Date: Fri, 14 Sep 2012 14:32:03 -0400
From: Barry Warsaw <barry at canonical.com>
To: bazaar at lists.canonical.com
Subject: Re: using bazaar for backup and synchronization of home
	directory
Message-ID: <20120914143203.7e7ea3d1 at resist.wooz.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

On Sep 14, 2012, at 09:48 AM, Gary Furash wrote:

>1. has anyone tried backing up some or all of their "home" directory 
>(whatever you consider that to be) to a bazaar repository? That way, 
>you would have (1) an automated backup and (b) great history and (c) 
>easy synchronization across devices.

d) Really easy deployment to new machines.

Yes, I've been doing this for years and it's fantastic.  Actually, I've done
it with previous vcs's such as Subversion and CVS before that, but using
Bazaar is by far the least painful of the bunch.  I essentially keep all my
~/.??* files ~/bin and ~/env (which holds all my personal emacs and random
files) under Bazaar, with the repository on an internal server that gets
backed up to my NAS.  Using bzr+ssh allows me to do pulls and pushes even
when I'm remote.

Here's the trick that works for me.  When I have a new desktop, I basically
do
this:

$ cd /tmp
$ bzr branch bzr+ssh://repo.example.com/home/repos/barry/base
$ mv base/.bzr ~
$ cd
$ bzr revert

No complaints, and it works perfectly.

>3. would 1 prohibit you from using your companies' source control sytem 
>(e.g., git) for subsets of items

I can't speak to that, but I do have lots of directories under ~/projects
that live in just about every open source vcs in existence, and I never get
any interference.  It even works great on my mixed environment of Linux and
OS X machines.

FWIW, I also used to do the same with my system's /etc files.  I still do,
but I use etckeeper on Ubuntu to manage those repos (with an occasional
manual push to my internal repo server).

Cheers,
-Barry
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: not available
URL:
<https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/bazaar/attachments/20120914/89151a12/atta
chment-0001.pgp>

------------------------------

Message: 5
Date: Sat, 15 Sep 2012 10:26:47 +1000
From: Martin Pool <mbp at sourcefrog.net>
To: Bazaar <bazaar at lists.canonical.com>
Subject: Re: Bzr development stopped
Message-ID:
	<CAA9uavDktVEvqBWoXsH3AJ_PFKdt6028zF3mBKZARfhiw+BBNQ at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

On 14 September 2012 16:05, Stephen J. Turnbull <stephen at xemacs.org> wrote:

> Can we get back to the issue of how to encourage contribution to the
project?

It's very simple: start committing code, reviewing patches, making releases,
and make it visible.  I promise to give timely helpful reviews or advice if
asked.

One new community-driven release with one bug fixed will do more to
encourage others than any number of list posts.

If people want to work on Bazaar but don't want to do it within Canonical's
ballpark, they can fork it.  Given Canonical's decreased activity recently,
such a fork has a greater chance of becoming the centre of gravity.

I get the distinct impression some people would rather pontificate than
hack, and the contributor agreement, while a valid concern, is also an
excuse.  I would be utterly delighted to be proved wrong.
(nb, verbal argument on this point would be hilarious but
self-defeating.)

--
Martin

------------------------------

-- 
bazaar mailing list
bazaar at lists.canonical.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/bazaar

End of bazaar Digest, Vol 91, Issue 16
**************************************