Synchronizing xs-0.3 and xo-??? --- backups

[Eben Eliason]

2008/4/22 Tomeu Vizoso <tomeu at tomeuvizoso.net>:
> 2008/4/22 Martin Langhoff <martin.langhoff at gmail.com>:
>
> > On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 10:18 PM, Ivan Krstić
>  >  <krstic at solarsail.hcs.harvard.edu> wrote:
>  >  >  My solution is the simplest design I could create that allows both
>  >  > emergency restore (laptop FS has been trashed, get everything back) and
>  >  > individual file restore and sharing via a web interface running on the XS,
>  >
>  >  Indeed, reading bug 4200 the purpose of the protocol becomes clearer.
>  >  What I don't understand completely is the drive behind retrieving the
>  >  files via a web interface. I'd think that the main requirement is that
>  >  the Journal can talk to it in a simple enough fashion -- perhaps it
>  >  was a shortcut to avoid complex work on the Journal?
>
>  Yes, having the journal activity browsing its own backup as well as
>  the public sections of the other children could be quite a bit of
>  work. A web app that allowed clicking on a link and having that entry
>  installed in the journal seemed much better in the short-medium term.

Well, let's not confuse these two use cases.  I think they are quite
different.  Use case (a) offers a child a way to individually recover
entries that they themselves created, but which have since been
deleted from their Journal.  Use case (b) offers a child a way to
browse a repository of work that other children have created, with the
ability to download, share, and modify those works.  I think (a)
deserves to be tied closely to the Journal UI, which serves as a
history of what a given child has done, and is likely the place one
already will be when discovering one wants something that has been
deleted.  Case (b) is much more appropriate as a web app, and for that
matter likely requires additional UI capabilities for determining what
is allowed to be presented in this manner....we don't want every
backed up entry to be publicly shared with the world.

- Eben