Would you rethink your usage of the term "volume"?

[ovizii]

I just read your readme, and it reads like this, mixing your term volumes with docker volumes. I think that is highly confusing.

Zerobyte supports multiple volume backends including NFS, SMB, WebDAV, and local directories. A volume represents the source data you want to back up and monitor.

To add your first volume, navigate to the "Volumes" section in the web interface and click on "Create volume". Fill in the required details such as volume name, type, and connection settings.

If you want to track a local directory on the same server where Zerobyte is running, you'll first need to mount that directory into the Zerobyte container. You can do this by adding a volume mapping in your docker-compose.yml file. For example, to mount /path/to/your/directory from the host to /mydata in the container, you would add the following line under the volumes section:

[nicotsx]

Yes if you have a better suggestion I'm open for change. Source?

[ovizii]

"Source" is definitely better than volume, maybe also consider calling them assets?

I'm just getting started with zerobyte, so I don't have any experience. Looking at the screenshot in your README, you call each backup job "backups"? If a backup job (a much better term in my opinion) consists of one or more "sources or assets" + a schedule and a target repository, that kinda makes sense.

I looked at other tools, backrest calls them "plans" and a plan consists of paths + schedule + target repository.

Thanks for listening, feel free to close the discussion, I just wanted to make a suggestion.

[mptpro]

I like "source" and "destination".