Index | Thread | Search

From:
Kirill A. Korinsky <kirill@korins.ky>
Subject:
Re: [NEW] net/b2
To:
Abel Abraham Camarillo Ojeda <acamari@verlet.org>
Cc:
Paul Galbraith <paul@galbraiths.ca>, A Tammy <openbsd.ports@aisha.cc>, ports@openbsd.org
Date:
Tue, 30 Jul 2024 11:13:58 +0200

Download raw body.

Thread
  • Klemens Nanni:

    [NEW] net/b2

  • Kirill A. Korinsky:

    [NEW] net/b2

  • Kirill A. Korinsky:

    [NEW] net/b2

On Mon, 29 Jul 2024 23:21:23 +0200,
Abel Abraham Camarillo Ojeda <acamari@verlet.org> wrote:
> 
> Then maybe we need the following?:
> 
> b2 -> backblaze-b2
> b2v3 -> backblaze-b2v3
> b2v4 -> backblaze-b2v4
> 
> Referred docs still tell you to use `b2` straight: "if you want the latest
> bells and whistles..."
>

Here two use case:

1. Inside console for manual operation which is quite rare and use
   backblaze-b2 instead of b2 is ok, special if user may add alias to forgot
   about used prefix.

2. Inside scripts, and replacing all scripts from /usr/bin/env b2v3 to
   /usr/bin/env backblaze-b2v3 seems like a nigthmare, special if it shared
   with other platforms or where b2 is installed via pip or pix.

I suggest to mixup things by keeping backblaze-b2 for CLI, and b2vX for scripts.

-- 
wbr, Kirill