[Box Backup-dev] Testing Boxi 0.1.1

[E.W. Peter Jalajas]

Thanks, Chris.
Replies below.
Pete

--- Chris Wilson <chris@qwirx.com> wrote:

> Hi Pete,
> 
> On Sun, 1 Oct 2006, E.W. Peter Jalajas wrote:
> 
> I'm not sure how I should make it clearer. Suggestions welcome. 
> Directories that are explicitly included (as location roots) have a
> green 
> tick, and their children have grey ticks. Directories that are are 
> explicitly excluded have red crosses, and their children grey
> crosses.

I put in a ticket 1569274 at
http://sourceforge.net/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=1569274&group_id=135105&atid=731482

> > BUG?:  Continuing to hit Start Backup on the Backup panel showed
> the 
> > same result, eventhough, I think, that file should not be being
> backed 
> > up because it hasn't changed.  To rephrase, nowhere does it say how
> many 
> > files (and bytes) were actually backed up during a "Start Backup"
> run.
> 
> Well, the user probably doesn't care so much about the actual number
> of 
> bytes sent over the wire, rather the amount of their data that is
> "safe" 
> on the remote server. I don't think Box makes it easy for us to get
> the 
> number of bytes, but I can try.

Yeah, no, I just think it would help me if it reported something about
what it just did.  I don't think it needs to report bytes in any way,
maybe just the number of files that were backed up during that run. 
Knowing that I have some hundreds or thousands of files (and maybe MBs)
backed up "safe" is also interesting, but maybe could be reported
separately, maybe as a separate line in that same table ("This run:",
"Total protected:")?

> > BUG?:  New related issue, though:  I set it up to backup a few more
> > files, which appeared to backup correctly, but I couldn't see them
> > under Restore Files until restarting Boxi.
> 
> Same thing? Close and reopen the parent node?

Yeah, no, I did that and no change, so it's a real bug, 1569279:
http://sourceforge.net/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=1569279&group_id=135105&atid=731482
(although it could certainly be Operator Error).

> > By the way, the Backup Files, "Exclusions" tab uses the "Exclu*"
> words 
> > about 5 times as a bit of a misnomer, because it includes
> "Includes". I 
> > don't have a better name yet though, except "Exclusions/Inclusions"
> 
> > ("Exceptions" would cause confusion with the error states, I would 
> > think.).  Maybe "Modifications"?
> 
> Exceptions?

"Exceptions" to me is too connotated with "error", but I don't feel too
strongly about it.  

>From http://thesaurus.reference.com/browse/exception for Exception, for
fun:
	allowance, anomalism, anomaly, departure, deviation, difference,
dispensation, eccentricity, exemption, freak, inconsistency,
irregularity, nonconformity, oddity, peculiarity, perquisite,
privilege, privileged person, quirk
 	aberration, abnormality, departure, deviation, eccentricity,
exception, incongruity, inconsistency, irregularity, oddity,
peculiarity, rarity, unconformity
	alter, be unlike, clash with, conflict with, contradict, contrast,
depart from, deviate from, digress, disagree, divaricate from, diverge,
diversify, jar with, lack resemblance, modify, not conform, qualify,
reverse, show contrast, stand apart, take exception, turn, vary

"Quirks" has a certain ring to it, not sure why.  :^)