3 Commits

Include renames

Author	SHA1	Message	Date
flan	ca906f5ee4	docs: TrueNAS 26 is supported; record what has actually been run ... The README and how-it-works still said "TrueNAS 26: nested snapshots are not supported yet" and "the third is not fixed, and is why 26 reports BROKEN". Both shipped in v0.7.0 and are now false — exactly the kind of stale claim that misleads somebody deciding whether to trust this with their backups. Adds docs/verification.md: what has ACTUALLY been run, as opposed to what the support matrix proves. The matrix is static analysis — it shows the patch's assumptions still hold, which is a strictly weaker claim than "a backup ran and a restore came back". The new file records the three live tasks exercised on 25.10.4 (nested, nested+zvols, non-nested), the md5 of the file that came back out of B2, the real orphan the collector reclaimed from the pool, and what is NOT covered (24.10/25.04 unrun; master broken; no reboot on v0.7.0). The README now points at it, next to the matrix it qualifies. The how-it-works TrueNAS 26 section now explains the part that mattered: the public pool.* queries are not like-for-like replacements for the deleted private zfs.* ones — they apply a visibility policy hiding 84 of 270 datasets on a real pool, including live app data — and the rule the module now follows (read the truth from ZFS, make changes through middleware). Plus the divergence nothing warned about: 26 decides `recursive` by a different rule than this patch decides `nested`, which orphaned one snapshot per zvol on every run until ownership of the sweep was made unconditional.	2026-07-14 02:22:36 +00:00
flan	518a22d87e	docs: user-facing URLs point at GitHub, the user-facing repo ... Gitea is canonical for development; GitHub is where users clone from and where the box's read-only checkout points. The install instructions, the re-clone hint and the 'file an issue' link are all read by users, so they name GitHub. docs/releasing.md still names Gitea, because that is a contributor doc about where the code is pushed.	2026-07-13 18:42:44 +00:00
flan	252696f1de	docs: split the 969-line README; put Install at the top ... Install was at line 517 of 969, under the boot sequence, the snapshot lifecycle and the release process. Someone deciding whether to trust this with their backups should not have to scroll past any of that. README is now 211 lines: what it does, the minimum version, install, the support matrix, updating, uninstall. Everything else moved to docs/ (nested snapshots, how it works, recovery, CLI, releasing). A test enforces it: every internal link resolves, Install stays near the top, and the README does not grow back. Moving Markdown breaks cross-references -- it broke eight of them here, including one in a recovery doc, where the person following the link is by definition already having a bad day.	2026-07-13 18:34:44 +00:00