From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Alex Kost Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/6] gnu: Add borg. Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2016 11:14:24 +0300 Message-ID: <87a8lp3927.fsf@gmail.com> References: <14fe75ec9c8b651be6a5240dd5444e558615e1e1.1457998381.git.leo@famulari.name> <878u1k2jik.fsf@gmail.com> <20160315091845.GA9602@jasmine> <20160321213115.GA2717@jasmine> <20160321223519.GA6523@jasmine> <20160321225259.GA7558@jasmine> <87mvpqtgbu.fsf@gmail.com> <20160322212525.GB13372@jasmine> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:36068) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aidvw-0006X9-9O for guix-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 23 Mar 2016 04:14:29 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aidvt-0007zM-2I for guix-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 23 Mar 2016 04:14:28 -0400 Received: from mail-lf0-x241.google.com ([2a00:1450:4010:c07::241]:33142) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aidvs-0007zE-QM for guix-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 23 Mar 2016 04:14:24 -0400 Received: by mail-lf0-x241.google.com with SMTP id w7so498731lfd.0 for ; Wed, 23 Mar 2016 01:14:24 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20160322212525.GB13372@jasmine> (Leo Famulari's message of "Tue, 22 Mar 2016 17:25:25 -0400") List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org To: Leo Famulari Cc: guix-devel@gnu.org Leo Famulari (2016-03-23 00:25 +0300) wrote: > On Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 11:20:37PM +0300, Alex Kost wrote: [...] >> The rest looks good to me, so if you checked that this program works, I >> think you can push this patchset. > > I've been using this program for a few months without problems (yes, I > do restore from time to time). > > It's being developed very rapidly for something so critical as a backup > program, so I think that it's still a bit experimental. I could allude > to that in the description. What do you think? I don't know :-) Do what seems appropriate to you, I think it will be OK in any case. -- Alex