After the removal of the legacy ssh: RPC protocol with #9732 (with a few exceptions, see below), it might be worth considering renaming the rest: URI scheme of the new REST protocol to ssh:.
At this point, use of the legacy ssh: URI scheme is limited to borg2 transfer --from-borg1. Since --from-borg1 only supports the legacy RPC protocol anyway, Borg could select that mode implicitly when this option is used. The only other component that still uses the legacy RPC protocol is borg2 serve without --rest. However, borg2 serve is not affected by URI scheme naming, as it selects its mode via CLI options rather than a repo URI. This would free up the ssh: URI scheme while keeping the remaining borg1 compatibility paths available through explicit compatibility modes.
We could then rename the rest: URI scheme back to ssh:. Historically, the URI scheme indicated how the connection to the remote repo was established. From a user's perspective, this was very intuitive. With the introduction of rest:, that association was somewhat lost.
Prior discussion: #9593 (comment)
Related: #9766
After the removal of the legacy
ssh:RPC protocol with #9732 (with a few exceptions, see below), it might be worth considering renaming therest:URI scheme of the new REST protocol tossh:.At this point, use of the legacy
ssh:URI scheme is limited toborg2 transfer --from-borg1. Since--from-borg1only supports the legacy RPC protocol anyway, Borg could select that mode implicitly when this option is used. The only other component that still uses the legacy RPC protocol isborg2 servewithout--rest. However,borg2 serveis not affected by URI scheme naming, as it selects its mode via CLI options rather than a repo URI. This would free up thessh:URI scheme while keeping the remaining borg1 compatibility paths available through explicit compatibility modes.We could then rename the
rest:URI scheme back tossh:. Historically, the URI scheme indicated how the connection to the remote repo was established. From a user's perspective, this was very intuitive. With the introduction ofrest:, that association was somewhat lost.Prior discussion: #9593 (comment)
Related: #9766