I understand that opinion but I don't believe that will enable the largest growth of the LAFS-ecosystem.
Maybe I'm wrong but I think the large mass of users will remain locked out of being able to install and configure daemons - but finding 10s or 100s providers to use that can offer S3, SWIFT, or is doable now - and doesn't diminish the market that (I think) LeastAuthority and Havenco are trying to address. As I said we'll summarize LAFS-related user feedback and in the mean time just try to help augment install and basic usage FAQs. Avi (Greg wrote:) > freed...@freedman.net (Avi Freedman) writes: > > > Right now I think you have to do FUSE mounts of S3 or webdav or something > > else and run the storage node on top of that but longer term I think > > being able to support no-software-install standard-protocol backend > > nodes as an option would be great for LAFS. > > This is IMHO a serious technical step backwards. We have standard > interfaces and a narrow waist for filesystem interfaces, much like IP, > which means that tahoe does not need to know about all of these > backends. _______________________________________________ tahoe-dev mailing list tahoe-dev@tahoe-lafs.org https://tahoe-lafs.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tahoe-dev
