• 1 Post
  • 53 Comments
Joined 5 months ago
cake
Cake day: October 17th, 2025

help-circle





  • For restic:

    1. Every backup is incremental after the first or rather restic makes no distinction because it chunks and dedups the data on the way in so if it’s already in the repo it doesn’t get stored twice.
    2. Restic has customisable ‘forget’ cmd that can do whatever you want
    3. Restic has filtering flags, you can use a gitignore style file also. Many people use a wrapper though like autorestic.
    4. The ghost files are interesting. Restic has nothing special for this. A script that mirrored those files and wrote them all as 0 bytes which restic could then backup would be possible, this would work same for any backup tool.
    5. You get that summary after every restic backup. You can also compare snapshots and mount them all to run your own analysis if you want.
    6. Again if you mount a restic backup you have access to every file and snapshot taken in the repo. You could compare or diff them using usual tools.
    7. There is a ‘exclude-if-present’ option where you can say if a file with the name of your choosing is present do not backup that dir etc






  • The danger being raised with the licensing is that you can’t license something if you’re not considered to be the author. There are growing examples of courts and lawmakers determining AI output to be public domain:

    The US Supreme Court recently refused to reconsider Thaler v. Perlmutter, in which the plaintiff sought to overturn a lower court decision that he could not copyright an AI-generated image. This is an area of ongoing concern among the defenders of copyleft because many open source projects incorporate some level of AI assistance. It’s unclear how much AI involvement in coding would dilute the human contribution to the extent that a court would disallow a copyright claim.

    https://www.theregister.com/2026/03/06/ai_kills_software_licensing/

    This is an evolving, global situation and hard to know what to do right now. I think what you’ve got is fine though - you’ve made it clear your intention is to license with AGPL. It’s just that depending on the jurisdiction it might be public domain instead.

    This is another reason to be clear about the use of AI in the README so your users can make an informed decision.