Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Duplicacy: Lock-free deduplication cloud backup tool, with “fair source” license

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 72 posts

Re: Duplicacy: Lock-free deduplication cloud backup tool, with “fair source” license

#21

Post by _jal »

koolba wrote: post #8
acrosync wrote: post #2

Developer here. Duplicacy is built on the concept of Lock-Free Deduplication ( https://github.com/gilbertchen/duplicacy/blob/master/DESIGN.... ), which allows it to backup multiple computers to the same storage without using any locks. Currently it supports local or networked drives, SFTP servers, Amazon S3, Backblaze B2, Microsoft Azure, Google Cloud Storage, Google Drive, OneDrive, Dropbox, and Hubic. I recently re…

From the link to the license: > Fair Source has the power to promote diversity within the developer community . To date, contributing to open source has been an expensive proposition for developers. You have to have a stable income and a lot of extra time to work on side projects for free, which means talented developers from underprivileged backgrounds often aren’t able to contribute. Fair Source allows developers t…

Completely disagree that the reasoning is bogus.

I object to the name. It is clearly an attempt rebrand proprietary licensing by capitalizing on associations with open source. Trademark law of course doesn't apply, and I wouldn't want it to if it did, but this is pretty much the definition of causing confusion in the marketplace.

Re: Duplicacy: Lock-free deduplication cloud backup tool, with “fair source” license

#22

Post by acrosync »

bmaranville wrote: post #20

I had been using rclone ( https://rclone.org/ ) for Amazon S3, which has some of the same features but recently the application key was blocked by Amazon. Is duplicacy safe from the same fate?

I think Amazon only blocked rclone's application key for Amazon Drive. There is no way for Amazon to prevent a third-party application from accessing S3, since users provide their own S3 credentials and Amazon doesn't know who is on the other side.

Re: Duplicacy: Lock-free deduplication cloud backup tool, with “fair source” license

#23

Post by bascule »

Some claims:

"It is the only cloud backup tool that allows multiple computers to back up to the same storage simultaneously without using any locks (thus readily amenable to various cloud storage services)"

"What is novel about lock-free deduplication is the absence of a centralized indexing database for tracking all existing chunks and for determining which chunks are not needed any more. Instead, to check if a chunk has already been uploaded before, one can just perform a file lookup via the file storage API using the file name derived from the hash of the chunk."

Tahoe-LAFS's immutable file model (based on convergent encryption) was capable of doing this same thing a decade ago, and also features a pretty nifty capability-based security model:

https://tahoe-lafs.org/trac/tahoe-lafs

Re: Duplicacy: Lock-free deduplication cloud backup tool, with “fair source” license

#24

Post by CogitoCogito »

acrosync wrote: post #18
whyagaindavid wrote: post #11

The name is too similar to Duplicity; do you mind renaming?

I didn't want to sound like duplicity intentionally, but duplicacy.com was still available at that time and I thought it was a perfect name for a backup tool...

For what it's worth, I thought this was Duplicity until I read the comment even after I did a quick glance at the github repo. Since you're both in backup, this is going to be very confusing to people.

Re: Duplicacy: Lock-free deduplication cloud backup tool, with “fair source” license

#26

Post by wmf »

zekevermillion wrote: post #16

I think I understand the goals of the "fair source" license but why not make it copyleft all around, and just sell hosted version to small biz, and license exceptions to corporate clients?

Nobody needs the exception so they won't buy it. That business model only works for copyleft libraries.

Re: Duplicacy: Lock-free deduplication cloud backup tool, with “fair source” license

#27

Post by kefka »

Reported to Github, as Commercial software masquerading as various open free license projects (MIT, GPL, BSD, etc.).

Also, intentional namespace pollution with existing backup tool, which IS gpl'ed.

Not cool. Not cool at all.

____________________________________

(response, since I'm submitting 'too fast'... ):

Github has commercial repos, and private repos.

It's pretty simple, really. If you want the free options on GH, you choose from a list of standard Open Source licenses. https://github.com/blog/1964-open-source-license-usage-on-gi...

It's also asked you create a LICENSE file, to go along with this.

Their license, however, is very much NON-FREE. As in, if I click clone, since I work for an employer of 50k people, I'm in violation. Full stop. And we're not even talking about developing on it, or submitting PR's, or what have you. This is simple copy which puts me in violation.

It's very much against the spirit of GitHub, and probably against the license on GH as well.

And it also is attempting to dilute another project that does similarly. Just so happens they're 2 letters different. Duplicacy vs Duplicity. That's an asshole thing to do.

Here's a few names I just devised: ClouDuplicate , Clouder, DupliCloud, CfC (cloud file cloud)..

Instead, it's very uncool to try to pollute an existing namespace of the same thing. Talking about pro-level bad will here.

Re: Duplicacy: Lock-free deduplication cloud backup tool, with “fair source” license

#30

Post by wmf »

dom0 wrote: post #17

The verdict of the "open source competition" in Duplicacy's README is not entirely accurate. Exclusive locking in the sync'd approach is just the easiest implementation, not the sole possibility. I can't speak for other tools, since I do not know their internals well enough, but I can say about Borg ( http://www.borgbackup.org/ ) that there is no inherent issue in running the important parts of making backups (i.e. u…

As a user, I don't give credit for features that could be implemented. Somehow they found time to implement this feature and Borg didn't, so they are legitimately ahead in that aspect.
Post reply on HN