As the old Google Drive application is being depreciated on all platforms, I vote that we need new tags for its successors Drive File Stream and Google Backup and Sync in order to distinguish between the two.

I propose that we add the tag drive-file-stream with a synonym google-drive-file-stream, with drive-file-stream being the master as it is Google's intended name for the utility.

Additionally I propose we add the tag google-backup-and-sync for Google's other drive sync utility.

drive-file-stream and google-backup-and-sync should not be synonymized, as they are two separate utilities which perform different functions.

| |

The two Google synchronization clients are not related to one another. Google Backup and Sync only works with Google Drive accounts. While Google Drive File Stream only works with G Suite accounts.

So Sounds like we need two tags one simply google-drive-file-stream and the other google-backup-and-sync which should not be synonymous with one another since they are entirely different and unrelated with one another.

Likewise, we should modify the description of the current google-drive tag to indicate it shouldn't be used. Since the client itself has been discontinued and to based on what I know cannot even be used nor can it be downloaded.

| |
  • Yes, I was aware of the difference between the two utilities - what you've said was what I more or less intended. I've edited my post to make things more clear. – Next-Door Tech Aug 8 '18 at 0:08
  • I'm currently writing a self-answered question that needs the tag drive-file-stream - should I go ahead and post and put in a retag-request post in meta, or should I not to avoid meta spam? – Next-Door Tech Aug 8 '18 at 17:06
  • You should simply create the tag google-drive-file-stream when you submit your question. As I pointed out, Google Drive has been discontinued and cannot be used, and Google Backup and Sync is not applicable to a G Suite account. Of course just remember that if it has anything to do with the web application potion, that it's not actually within scope here at Superuser, and it will be treated as such. The appropriate tag description and wiki should be created when the tag is created. Indicating the proper usage of the tag, otherwise, a new tag is sort of pointless. – Ramhound Aug 8 '18 at 17:35

Someone has granted your wish:

| |
  • 1
    Why were tags created without usage guidance? – Ramhound Nov 3 '18 at 21:15
  • 1
    You disagree with mentioning the tags the poster asked for? And why do you - and the person who voted for you - ask me about usage guidance? I'm not the one who created the tags. I merely linked to them. – LWC Nov 5 '18 at 21:40
  • Just edited it to clarify. Hope it'll encourage to undo some downvotes. – LWC Nov 6 '18 at 22:04
  • @LWC, I suspect the downvotes may stem from people making an assumption. Normally, tag actions are proposed, and the community weighs in, agreeing and disagreeing. When and if there's a consensus, that action is taken. Typically, the person doing the action or the OP closes the loop on the status. In this case, it looks like there wasn't much of a mandate. (cont'd) – fixer1234 Nov 7 '18 at 6:03
  • 2
    The fact that you posted this as an answer, rather than a comment, gave the appearance that you created the tags; i.e., jumped the gun on the tag action before it was a settled matter (and then didn't create wiki excerpts). Or some downvoters may disagree that the tags it appeared you created were the right way to go. So if you were just providing notification that the dust has settled on the question, it looks like you may have accidentally stepped on something that soiled your shoes. No good deed goes unpunished. :-) – fixer1234 Nov 7 '18 at 6:03
  • @fixer1234 Your commentary explains my vote at least initially , then the author’s poor attitude, makes it impossible for me to reverse my vote. – Ramhound Nov 7 '18 at 12:04

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .