What should a safe Takeout reconstruction report prove?
I built Takeout Export Reconstructor for the point where a large Google Takeout stops being a folder operation. Before launch, I am looking for practitioner feedback on one boundary: what evidence should be visible before writing output?
The current release keeps source ZIPs unchanged, identifies missing parts, distinguishes byte-identical duplicates from genuine conflicts, previews planned paths, resumes interrupted reconstruction, and writes an audit manifest. It runs locally; the source export is not uploaded.
If you manage split or incremental Takeouts, what would make you trust the result most: conflict choices, sidecar provenance, timestamp preservation, or a dry-run manifest? I am the maker (RomeoApps), and the product is scheduled to launch tomorrow at €29.
Replies