5 ms·
I, for one, prefer the directness of not having to go through a front-end proxy. It probably eliminates some failure modes. I think that, instead of Backblaze p
by mwcampbell 11y ago
I, for one, prefer the directness of not having to go through a front-end proxy. It probably eliminates some failure modes. I think that, instead of Backblaze providing an S3-compatible API, someone should do an open-source S3-compatible front-end for B2, that any interested user can run on a cheap VPS.
- khc 11y agoIf someone writes a jclouds provider for B2, you can then use https://github.com/andrewgaul/s3proxy https://github.com/andrewgaul/s3proxy to interface with it
- toomuchtodo 11y agohttps://libcloud.apache.org/ https://libcloud.apache.org/
- narsil 11y agoI work at https://kloudless.com https://kloudless.com. While not S3-compatible, we offer a similar proxy that provides a single API to multiple storage services such as Dropbox, Box, Google Drive, SharePoint, etc. We've also released support for S3 and Azure and are looking into B2.
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]