Jeremie Courreges-Anglas <j...@wxcvbn.org> wrote: > On Thu, Oct 25 2018, Andreas Kusalananda Kähäri <andreas.kah...@nbis.se> > wrote: > > On Thu, Oct 25, 2018 at 12:05:40PM +0200, Solene Rapenne wrote: > >> "Anthony J. Bentley" <anth...@anjbe.name> wrote: > >> > Solene Rapenne writes: > >> > > > >> > > faubackup homepage is not working anymore. > >> > > >> > Any idea what to use for MASTER_SITES? > >> > >> indeed, it doesn't work either. > >> Seems that the project homepage doesn't provide sources :( > >> > > > > FWIW, Debian says it's dead upstream and removed it in 2016. > > https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/faubackup/+publishinghistory > > Actually Ubuntu removed it in 2016, Debian removed it in 2010. > > https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=520013 > > * Package is orphaned. > * Dead upstream (Upstream author abandoned development). > * No development activity since 2006. > * Better alternatives (vbackup, dirvish). > > I suggest we do the same.
I can't find vbackup and dirvish in the ports tree. I disagree about the removal. If it works well and does the job, there is no need for developpers to continue working on it. It has no daemon and the only network component is using ssh comand. Sure there are others alternatives, we already have a lot of backup tools. But if it builds and works, why not keeping it? The way it's doing backup is quite unique (reminds me rsnapshot but far easier to use). I sent a mail to the authors found in the sources to ask them if they could provide a copy of the repository so I could re-up it again with commits history (on framagit). Even if we remove it from our ports tree, the sources will still be available. I wouldn't like to see opensource code being lost :(
