rustic-rs
Time for version 1?
I find rustic to be the best backup tool out there. So I would be happy to be able to easily install it in the most common Linux distributions. It's already in Arch. I'm considering trying to package it for Debian and/or Fedora, but it's a lot of work, because both Debian and Fedora build Rust crates offline, so all dependencies need to be packaged first. It would be a shame to work on it and not succeed.
For Debian, someone suggested packaging Rustic back in 2023: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1051541 But it seems there's some resistence, due to Rustic's home page describing Rustic as being in beta stage.
So isn't it time for a version 1.0 of Rustic? I mean, Rustic is more than three years old now :-)
Alternatively: If there were an announcement of a plan for version 1 within X months, or a release candidate, it could perhaps pave the way for beginning the packaging work?
Good news everyone! Rustic 10.0 was just released this morning!
😜
I too have been quietly awaiting 1.0, or at the very least removal of the "it is not recommended to use it for production backups" language from the README. :)
@jtackaberry, but in the "Releases" list of rustic, the recently released version is 0.10. And the readme still states, that it's beta stage software.
but in the "Releases" list of rustic, the recently released version is 0.10. And the readme still states, that it's beta stage software.
I know, I was just poking fun at the fact that the latest release was clearly typoed as 10.0.
Which now seems to be fixed, but was showing as 10.0 at time of release.
Sorry for the typo 🙈..
About the version 1: I think it will take some time to reach such a version (given the fact that the 5 year older restic hasn't got a 1.x version yet it might take even longer..) About the disclaimer: We'll try to increase test coverage and enhance error handling but this is hard and tend. IMO these are the two most important points to "get rid of" that disclaimer. Also help about these things is warmly welcome - we have a notorious lack on time with the core developers...
I found this Package recently and I'm not sure how to interpret the Disclaimer: "We'll try to in crease the test coverage". That sound good. But test coverage != Stability. Is the System already Stable in that sense, that there are no major bugs and crashes? Or are the Tests necessary to find these "Bugs". For my Software I need an Interface to directly control the Backups via Rust. So restic isn't really an option. On the other hand. Once I build a Solution it should "work" without randomly crashing while doing Backups (As long as it crashes on Development it's fine for me and I can work around it / switch early on). Any Option on that?
